Re: [gentoo-user] gcc-4.1.1

["Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy@veldy.net>]

Bob Young wrote:
> Depends on what you consider sufficient. Although what the page recommends
> was misquoted, it actually suggests:
>
> emerge -e system
> emerge -e system
> emerge -e world
> emerge -e world
>
> That's probably is a little bit excessive, but the reason for doing the two
> emerge -e systems is so that the new tool chain is built with the new tool
> chain. At the end of the first emerge -e system you may have a new compiler,
> but that new compiler was built with the old compiler. What you actually
> want is a gcc-4.1.1 that was built with gcc-4.1.1. You could emerge the
> compiler twice before doing the emerge -e system, but the the emerges that
> happen before glibc is rebuilt are linked against a glibc that was built
> with the old compiler. Same with the rest of the tool chain and libraries.
>
>   
Hmm ... unless the build of gcc has changed over the years, it used to 
build the compiler as a bootstrap and then use new compiler (xgcc) to 
build the final compiler for install (gcc).  Thus, the standard make 
script already builds the compiler twice.  I don't know that a compiler 
rebuild is really necessary when binutils is updated.




-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list