MIkey wrote:
> A bug, again, that the stage1 installation method was immune to,

How come? (I'm not familiar with toolchain.eclass at all.)

> which is
> the topic at hand.  Not who reported what when.  I found that bug when it
> hit me and noticed that it had been reported.  I thanked the Gods that you
> were working on it, that I hadn't attempted to upgrade a production box,
> and went about my business avoiding it by installing from stage1.

Aaaargh. You've mentioned "bug reports [...] on upgrading gcc via that
method". Got anything apropriate?

-jkt

-- 
cd /local/pub && more beer > /dev/mouth