From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KIfk2-0000IR-Te for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 15 Jul 2008 08:18:35 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9310AE02FB; Tue, 15 Jul 2008 08:18:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BD27E02FB for ; Tue, 15 Jul 2008 08:18:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AB4B65CD7 for ; Tue, 15 Jul 2008 08:18:32 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -3.525 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.525 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.074, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id psacq-jwhuIL for ; Tue, 15 Jul 2008 08:18:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E119666015 for ; Tue, 15 Jul 2008 08:18:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1KIfjn-00030d-Aj for gentoo-user@gentoo.org; Tue, 15 Jul 2008 08:18:19 +0000 Received: from athedsl-308599.home.otenet.gr ([85.73.253.21]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 15 Jul 2008 08:18:19 +0000 Received: from realnc by athedsl-308599.home.otenet.gr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 15 Jul 2008 08:18:19 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org From: Nikos Chantziaras Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: Problems compiling gcc 4.2.4 and 4.3.1-r1 Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 11:18:08 +0300 Organization: Lucas Barks Message-ID: References: <18554.44453.918859.552926@ccs.covici.com> <487B6E5A.6090508@rootservice.org> <18555.28650.309637.943440@ccs.covici.com> <18556.20982.520551.345852@ccs.covici.com> <18556.22467.794701.517276@ccs.covici.com> 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 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: athedsl-308599.home.otenet.gr User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; x86_64; en-US; rv:1.8.1.14) Gecko/20080421 Thunderbird/2.0.0.14 Mnenhy/0.7.5.0 In-Reply-To: <18556.22467.794701.517276@ccs.covici.com> Sender: news X-Archives-Salt: e1433885-c885-4632-9021-ca92ac5a28c3 X-Archives-Hash: 95ab504d32829f1314e7ef15e61995a3 John covici wrote: > on Tuesday 07/15/2008 Nikos Chantziaras(realnc@arcor.de) wrote > > Did you try updating glibc even though it's not a dependency with x86? > > Nope, because I was hesitant being this is an unstable version -- > maybe I should go completely unstable -- I will see what happens. I don't understand the logic. If you're hesitant to go unstable for one package, why aren't you less hesitant to go completely unstable? FWIW, I'm on stable with only a few packages unstable (including gcc and glibc; the latter only because gcc 4.3 needs it). -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list