From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2192 invoked by uid 1002); 16 May 2003 15:35:59 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 3259 invoked from network); 16 May 2003 15:35:59 -0000 From: David Nielsen To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <20030516162025.7090a0ef.spider@gentoo.org> References: <20030516022031.57157e45.spider@gentoo.org> <1053086453.22966.10.camel@wolf.codewordt.co.uk> <20030516162025.7090a0ef.spider@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1053099520.16398.3.camel@pilot.stavtrup-st.dk> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.3.3 (Preview Release) Date: 16 May 2003 17:38:40 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [WIP] gcc 3.3 X-Archives-Salt: 6e7856c0-eab1-44e6-9a22-c9937d3ad6f9 X-Archives-Hash: 6d2652a1827e045130d0a2f12affb4fe Just FYI, a few brave souls like myself have already been running GCC 3.3 of CVS for a period of time, and have found quite a few solutions to common problems with GCC 3.3 and various packages. There's a thread in Other things Gentoo on the forums that you might want to read, I forgot the complete link and I lack a browser right now so go search :) On Fri, 2003-05-16 at 16:20, Spider wrote: > begin quote > On 16 May 2003 13:00:53 +0100 > Dhruba Bandopadhyay wrote: > > > > There is an ebuild for it on bugzilla and one here and some on forums > > too. Have you used any of these as a definitive base or is this a new > > creation? > > Neither, I wanted a go at it again (I haven't been messing with gcc > since 3.1 days) so I started from last known working 3.2.3 and went on. > > > Also, is there any sign of this being entered into hardmasked or > > testig state on portage? > > I'm not the maintainer of gcc, so I shall leave that up to Azarah to > decide, let him distill the different builds along with his own > experience to see what goes. > > > > > I'd be quite keen on testing it out since I have had my fair share of > > pentium4 problems and am desperately hoping an upgrade of gcc will > > sort them out. > > It may, so far it appears some old c++ code will barf though. not sure > about glibc and kernel issues either. > > > > > Pardon my ignorance but have all these patches been commented out to > > prevent resultant problems or because they are no longer necessary? > > Thats up to the maintainer, since I havent taken the time to go through > the patches each in turn and verify wether it is needed anymore I just > commented it out to see what happened. I suspect a lot of them are no > longer necessary, and those that are will have to be re-diffed in a new > manner, not really an easy task. > > I suspect the real build won't enter portage until propolice is up in > speed though. > > //Spider > -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list