From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B903138A1A for ; Fri, 14 Nov 2014 04:52:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B271FE0905; Fri, 14 Nov 2014 04:52:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8F93AE08BA for ; Fri, 14 Nov 2014 04:52:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.95] (pool-173-71-215-127.clppva.fios.verizon.net [173.71.215.127]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jcallen) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 68AD23403C0 for ; Fri, 14 Nov 2014 04:52:25 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <54658A86.10807@gentoo.org> Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 23:52:22 -0500 From: Jonathan Callen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.2.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: gcc 4.7.3 --> 4.8.3 References: <9194407.LW02KBNQ1l@wstn> <20141110222302.6adfe4ef@digimed.co.uk> <5461DC1A.80503@gmail.com> <20141111210356.6326a0e9@digimed.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <20141111210356.6326a0e9@digimed.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archives-Salt: 68b09079-afc7-4c5e-a547-cd47f12f63cd X-Archives-Hash: 4168dd92b12dbb3745c335c8851c0985 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 11/11/2014 04:03 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote: > On Tue, 11 Nov 2014 20:19:36 +0000 (UTC), James wrote: >> >> Agreeded. But after a gcc update, I think it wise, especially >> since gcc-4.9 cometh....soon? > > Yes, things may be a little different with 4.9, but the last time a > rebuild was really required was,AFAIR, somewhere around 3.3. > > The last time a rebuild of (almost) everything was required was when the C++ ABI changed, with the associated bump of SONAME from libstdc++.so.5 (provided with GCC 3.3 and earlier) to libstdc++.so.6 (provided with GCC 3.4 and later). So you were close, but the major change happened with 3.4, not 3.3 ;). Some old binary software still requires libstdc++.so.5, which can still be installed from sys-libs/libstdc++-v3, which actually builds part of GCC 3.3.6 to get the libstdc++.so.5 to install. - -- Jonathan Callen -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJUZYqGAAoJELHSF2kinlg4sTYP/A1f89WjzUi4yqM+ob9XCovU sVbgWS2hW2UL8wDeRuqbQoF6fAtVBLx5J2+akR+TOJN7BQ1fORBOkfOtcdw1vn8l 8YZ8LVKSPvB9+EQimuiLGYfWSoVFOwsoc6zL6htFHQhdqb4+O7ceJ1Iqn/PcHxU2 srUnR/Fh5rD1dUch5borZ2Px/g9ivr/91PvTulPIR2940dhregpS+7PyvaZGl2FF Ov8f9ewdf5rDVBZxwzPHpF87dQIOl+0Bxkvr3M1a/yXKxJR38fqSuFI64hlpfln1 uadiytz1WpwEOwK12a36YsnVtenMJFwn2ySnyRGZRL1lltkzHX+RNqLv58lDO4KY jUEx9jBrNfN683X2DKFOkeshlhLHGchnahPTZkW5Vcs7NjTnmbI7V9p5oJkjf59u TftGNb1PTCA9eZYcxpujwkFy+0jiLagbukfxyUqLFMhEt3kTiSBeUVMpCHlBDC3Z XLCGpdj0lX9P6hUGzkz2S8nI/iX7z7MZx/EDtLRo61sE9r7zOQUTYgOISgm2cYge d8nvNguJ3iHESXTeAOu/C+nH+shPelaT62sF7rKUWc0GyudOXmttN9WiSNgN/1nI uuWPcOiP/1hGGl/qkJNrOId+j74lP4ljW3MHjFG+vsVUM+kBHzUFD8gIls2Q6qa4 beea0YeRqT+GLg1XGUvC =5KgF -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----