Re: [gentoo-user] Upgrading to gcc 4.1 , question on recompiling

Re: [gentoo-user] Upgrading to gcc 4.1 , question on recompiling

[Alexander Skwar]

Leonardo wrote:

> From what I've understand, different versions of gcc and glibc
> can coexist in the same gentoo system, and all other installed
> programs should have no problem if I choose the new gcc with
> gcc-config.
> 
> Am I right? 

Not quite. The problem is, that the gcc package not only delivers
the gcc compiler package, but also some libraries. Further, gcc
4.1.x compiled programs are not quite compatible with gcc 3.x compiled
programs - that's a problem, when you compile a library with 4.x
and still have 3.x compiled programs around.

> Because I don'want to recompile the whole system with a
> different gcc version

You really should recompile everything when you update to gcc 4.1.x
from 3.x. See the GCC upgrade doc at http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gcc-upgrading.xml


Alexander Skwar
-- 
<rm_-rf_> The real value of KDE is that they inspired and push the
          development of GNOME :-)
	-- #Debian
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Upgrading to gcc 4.1 , question on recompiling

[Philip Webb]

060719 Alexander Skwar wrote:
> Leonardo wrote:
>> different versions of gcc and glibc can coexist in the same system
>> and all other installed programs should have no problem
>> if I choose the new gcc with gcc-config.
> The problem is the gcc package not only delivers the gcc compiler package,
> but also some libraries. Further, gcc 4.1.x compiled programs are
> not quite compatible with gcc 3.x compiled programs -
> when you compile a lib with 4.x and still have 3.x compiled pgms around.
> You really should recompile everything
> when you update to gcc 4.1.x from 3.x.

I upgraded to 4.1.1 a couple of weeks ago & haven't done a mass recompile
& I have yet to run into any problem: yes, there's always tomorrow (grin).

-- 
========================,,============================================
SUPPORT     ___________//___,  Philip Webb : purslow@chass.utoronto.ca
ELECTRIC   /] [] [] [] [] []|  Centre for Urban & Community Studies
TRANSIT    `-O----------O---'  University of Toronto
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] Re: Upgrading to gcc 4.1 , question on recompiling

[Sven Köhler]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 937 bytes --]

>> The problem is the gcc package not only delivers the gcc compiler package,
>> but also some libraries. Further, gcc 4.1.x compiled programs are
>> not quite compatible with gcc 3.x compiled programs -
>> when you compile a lib with 4.x and still have 3.x compiled pgms around.
>> You really should recompile everything
>> when you update to gcc 4.1.x from 3.x.
> 
> I upgraded to 4.1.1 a couple of weeks ago & haven't done a mass recompile
> & I have yet to run into any problem: yes, there's always tomorrow (grin).

same here!


Well, but the problem that people see is, that actually the libstc++ of
gcc 4.1 _should_ be compatible with the libstdc++ of gcc 3.x - well, but
the gentoo-people are usually pessimistic about it :-)
And actually some incompatibilities are already known, i think (but they
didn't affect me *eg*)

(actually there was an ABI-switch within th gcc3.x series, before gcc
3.4 i think)


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 251 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Upgrading to gcc 4.1 , question on recompiling

[Alexander Skwar]

Philip Webb wrote:
> 060719 Alexander Skwar wrote:
>> Leonardo wrote:
>>> different versions of gcc and glibc can coexist in the same system
>>> and all other installed programs should have no problem
>>> if I choose the new gcc with gcc-config.
>> The problem is the gcc package not only delivers the gcc compiler package,
>> but also some libraries. Further, gcc 4.1.x compiled programs are
>> not quite compatible with gcc 3.x compiled programs -
>> when you compile a lib with 4.x and still have 3.x compiled pgms around.
>> You really should recompile everything
>> when you update to gcc 4.1.x from 3.x.
> 
> I upgraded to 4.1.1 a couple of weeks ago & haven't done a mass recompile
> & I have yet to run into any problem: yes, there's always tomorrow (grin).
> 

I upgraded to 4.1.1 and ran into massive problems. People might
remember a "short" thread on this list...

Because of the problems I had, I would *NEVER* encourage people
to *NOT* recompile everything.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
<rm_-rf_> The real value of KDE is that they inspired and push the
          development of GNOME :-)
	-- #Debian
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Upgrading to gcc 4.1 , question on recompiling

[Richard Broersma Jr]

> Because of the problems I had, I would *NEVER* encourage people
> to *NOT* recompile everything.

Sorry,  but double negatives only confuse me. :-)

So you are advocating that everyone recompile everything.

Regards,

Richard Broersma Jr.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Upgrading to gcc 4.1 , question on recompiling

[Alexander Skwar]

Richard Broersma Jr wrote:
>> Because of the problems I had, I would *NEVER* encourage people
>> to *NOT* recompile everything.
> 
> Sorry,  but double negatives only confuse me. :-)

Me too - sorry about that.

> So you are advocating that everyone recompile everything.

Yes, exactly. It *MIGHT* not be required, but I wouldn't bet a 0,01€ on it.
Also, I'd quite understand that bugs would be rejected, if it were so, that
the user would've upgraded to 4.1.x without recompiling everything. There
*ARE* known problems and the documentation states, that everything should
be recompiled.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
<rm_-rf_> The real value of KDE is that they inspired and push the
          development of GNOME :-)
	-- #Debian
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Upgrading to gcc 4.1 , question on recompiling

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1167 bytes --]

On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 15:34:08 +0200, Alexander Skwar wrote:

> > I upgraded to 4.1.1 a couple of weeks ago & haven't done a mass
> > recompile & I have yet to run into any problem: yes, there's always
> > tomorrow (grin).

> I upgraded to 4.1.1 and ran into massive problems. People might
> remember a "short" thread on this list...

Oh yes!

I recompiled glibc, to be on the safe side, and KDE because it did have
problems (and I wanted to see if the kdehiddenvisibility flag made any
difference) but nothing else caused a problem.

Running a testing system, most packages would be recompiled within a
month anyway.

> Because of the problems I had, I would *NEVER* encourage people
> to *NOT* recompile everything.

I prefer to let them make up their own minds about this. I'm not saying
people shouldn't recompile everything, just that it may not be necessary.
If you have problems, emerge -e world may be quicker than trying to track
down the troublesome packages. Me, I prefer to find and solve problems
than do the Gentoo equivalent of a reinstall.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

"Doing it right is no excuse for not meeting the schedule."

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Upgrading to gcc 4.1 , question on recompiling

[Philip Webb]

060719 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> 060719 Philip Webb wrote:
>> I upgraded to 4.1.1 a couple of weeks ago & haven't done a mass recompile
>> & I have yet to run into any problem
> I recompiled glibc, to be on the safe side
> and KDE because it did have problems, but nothing else caused a problem.

Yes, that's my situation: I also upgraded to Glibc 2.4 & KDE 3.5.3 ;
IIRC the only additional problem was a tiny glitch with Krusader,
which wasn't really related to GCC 4.1.1 .

> Running testing, most packages wb recompiled within a month anyway.

I have a lot of "testing" packages, which run without problems.
A lot of outstanding bugs seem to affect only a few special users.
Yet again, Gentoo should make a 4th category by making "stable" = "server"
& splitting "testing" into "newly unmasked" & "desktop-ready":
many "testing" packages today are in fact desktop-ready,
ie the remaining bugs will be rare & easy to recover from.

> I wanted to see if the 'kdehiddenvisibility' flag made any difference

What was your experience ?  Do you recommend others (me) to use it ?

-- 
========================,,============================================
SUPPORT     ___________//___,  Philip Webb : purslow@chass.utoronto.ca
ELECTRIC   /] [] [] [] [] []|  Centre for Urban & Community Studies
TRANSIT    `-O----------O---'  University of Toronto
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Upgrading to gcc 4.1 , question on recompiling

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1715 bytes --]

On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 20:06:13 -0400, Philip Webb wrote:

> > Running testing, most packages wb recompiled within a month anyway.
> 
> I have a lot of "testing" packages, which run without problems.

That's different to running a completely testing system, the vast
majority of your packages are still stable and thus, by definition, won't
change very often.

> A lot of outstanding bugs seem to affect only a few special users.
> Yet again, Gentoo should make a 4th category by making "stable" =
> "server" & splitting "testing" into "newly unmasked" & "desktop-ready":
> many "testing" packages today are in fact desktop-ready,
> ie the remaining bugs will be rare & easy to recover from.

Remember that the distinction is not about bugs in the software but in
the ebuilds. I think the current system is fine with a choice of a low
maintenance system where working packages change rarely and one where you
have access to closer to the bleeding edge. If you want true bleeding
edge, you can always add packages to /etc/portage/package.mask. The
control /etc/portage gives you makes multiple levels of ARCH
unnecessary. You have already created your own set of "desktop-ready"
packages by customising package.keywords. Someone else may have
different requirements, let each user choose for themself.
 
> > I wanted to see if the 'kdehiddenvisibility' flag made any difference
> 
> What was your experience ?  Do you recommend others (me) to use it ?

I can't say I noticed a difference, but it mainly affects KDE startup
time and that's something I rarely do, and don't hang around to watch.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

No program done by a hacker will work unless he is on the system.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Upgrading to gcc 4.1 , question on recompiling

[Alexander Skwar]

Philip Webb schrieb:

> A lot of outstanding bugs seem to affect only a few special users.

Like those, using KDE. But I wouldn't say, that those a just a
"few".

> Yet again, Gentoo should make a 4th category by making "stable" = "server"
> & splitting "testing" into "newly unmasked" & "desktop-ready":

Why? ~ is testing. The only problem I had, which caused me to
start the short thread, was, that the gcc upgrade doc *used to*
say, that upgrading from gcc 3.4.x to 4.1.x implied no risk.

> many "testing" packages today are in fact desktop-ready,
> ie the remaining bugs will be rare & easy to recover from.

Yep, quite easy to recover - recompile everything.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
Adam and Eve had many advantages, but the principal one was, that they escaped
teething.
		-- Mark Twain, "Pudd'nhead Wilson's Calendar"
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list