RE: [gentoo-user] gcc-4.1.1

["Bob Young" <BYoung@nucoretech.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jerry McBride [mailto:mcbrides9@comcast.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2006 7:10 PM
> To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] gcc-4.1.1
>
>
> On Wednesday 07 June 2006 21:50, Bob Young wrote:
> Note that the
> > article does in the end, do a double emerge -e system, so the
> the value of
> > updating a toolchain subset is questionable for the article's purposes.
> >
> > In short:
> >
> > emerge gcc-config glibc binutils libstdc++-v3 gcc
> > emerge gcc-config glibc binutils libstdc++-v3 gcc
> > emerge -e world
> >
> > To be clear, in order to make sure absolutely everything is
> updated and the
> > libraries that are linked against are also updated prior to use, the two
> > emerge -e system commands, are the definitive solution. For
> those who don't
> > want to spend many extra hours of compile time, in order to gain a 0.5%
> > increase in performance, the above is offered for consideration.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Bob Young
>
> Wow! I said the same thing a week or so ago and got the same rebuttal.
> However, it's what I do none the less. And it works.
>

I've been thinking about this over the last week or so. In particular the
fact that gcc always uses itself to build itself, does elminate the need for
building gcc twice. That being the case, emerging the new gcc then selecting
it as the default system compiler followed by a single emerge -e world
should be all that is necessary. I suppose it's possible that a few apps or
utilities that use static linking *could* possibly end up linking against
libraries that have not been rebuilt with the new compiler yet due to build
order issues. However since the number of apps and utilities that actually
use static linking is very small, it doesn't seem that a double emerge -e
world or system is justified.

That being said, seems these two articles appear to be giving out bad
information:

http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=282474&highlight=

http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-345229.html


If I've mis-characterisized the issue in the above description I'd
appreciate it if someone would correct any mis-statements. Lastly, since the
Gentoo handbook no longer describes a stage one install, is there any
"official" documentation that describes the *correct* way to do a stage3
install and end up with the same level of optimization and customization
that used to be provided by a stage1 install?

--
Regards,
Bob Young


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list