From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EEx2r-00058z-8u for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 12 Sep 2005 22:45:01 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j8CMbud6007178; Mon, 12 Sep 2005 22:37:56 GMT Received: from vms046pub.verizon.net (vms046pub.verizon.net [206.46.252.46]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j8CMQk12013364 for ; Mon, 12 Sep 2005 22:26:46 GMT Received: from mail.joat.com ([71.114.131.89]) by vms046.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2 HotFix 0.04 (built Dec 24 2004)) with ESMTPA id <0IMQ00BYQ6K0IY12@vms046.mailsrvcs.net> for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Mon, 12 Sep 2005 17:31:13 -0500 (CDT) Received: from localhost (cornholio.joat.com [127.0.0.1]) by mail.joat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26EE93417 for ; Mon, 12 Sep 2005 18:31:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.joat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (cornholio [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 01762-03 for ; Mon, 12 Sep 2005 18:31:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from butthead (butthead.joat.com [192.168.0.10]) by mail.joat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Mon, 12 Sep 2005 18:31:09 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2005 18:31:10 -0400 From: "Dave Nebinger" Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Nasty bugs in portage? To: Message-id: <005801c5b7e9$acdf5e70$0a00a8c0@butthead> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2670 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2670 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=Windows-1252; reply-type=original Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; b=mAk265oBFjIvMhZUb2EAfrD8RRF4TxiSho+jRQBGiPtwcHCB/kTrm0OISAY19NDszNw6mxia4sSYUuG0knkv1oClT5m8r4MiqXba2ktjuWUYEFgl76B2T5RQyHTCcO2zV/UM3oBKgA+jzO3TrR6jvv59a8wDE2pSeq0KLd1Q8HQ=; c=nofws; d=joat.com; q=dns; s=selector1 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new 2.3.2 (20050629) at joat.com References: <1126375769.5733.59.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200509102303.08309.volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> <1126420400.11899.23.camel@sf.rout.dyndns.org> <200509111838.37092.volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> <642958cc0509110958794615f7@mail.gmail.com> <20050911184526.4314eb50@hactar.digimed.co.uk> <43248287.8010508@planet.nl> <20050911230145.0616e58a@hactar.digimed.co.uk> <1126509081.5947.31.camel@localhost.localdomain> X-Archives-Salt: 5e6c27c3-c694-4998-859a-fbccfd666474 X-Archives-Hash: 298156d622dc56f9f96a77fefb484332 > If I get it right ``fix_libtool_files.sh'' corrects the settings for > libtool according to the native compiler if gcc has changed. During a > native install there isn't an older version of gcc. So this should be > (and was) the wrong answer. Incorrect. The stage 1 install starts with a generic 386 version of gcc and, when re-emerging the system, the version of gcc targeted for your system is built. So yes, there is an older version of gcc that did change and yes, it probably would have resolved the issue that you previously posted. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list