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 5616B138825 for ; Tue, 11 Nov 2014 20:20:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D6B27E088C; Tue, 11 Nov 2014 20:20:04 +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 87D80E0882 for ; Tue, 11 Nov 2014 20:20:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88E1034052E for ; Tue, 11 Nov 2014 20:20:02 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at gentoo.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.569 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.569 tagged_above=-999 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.568, BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.535, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 zjV96x8a3SDB for ; Tue, 11 Nov 2014 20:19:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1C980340523 for ; Tue, 11 Nov 2014 20:19:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XoHum-0007I0-BT for gentoo-user@gentoo.org; Tue, 11 Nov 2014 21:19:48 +0100 Received: from rrcs-71-40-157-251.se.biz.rr.com ([71.40.157.251]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 11 Nov 2014 21:19:48 +0100 Received: from wireless by rrcs-71-40-157-251.se.biz.rr.com with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 11 Nov 2014 21:19:48 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org From: James Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: gcc 4.7.3 --> 4.8.3 Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 20:19:36 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <9194407.LW02KBNQ1l@wstn> <20141110222302.6adfe4ef@digimed.co.uk> <5461DC1A.80503@gmail.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=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: sea.gmane.org User-Agent: Loom/3.14 (http://gmane.org/) X-Loom-IP: 71.40.157.251 (Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:29.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/29.0 SeaMonkey/2.26.1) X-Archives-Salt: c5745eb5-79aa-4b88-ab27-2a73cb8ba009 X-Archives-Hash: a423e4a4907c38d3b9152af5eb8459c1 Dale gmail.com> writes: > > Neil Bothwick wrote: > >> Rebooting catches *everything* even better than --emptytree ? > > --emptytree has nothing to do with rebooting. It simply forces emerge to > > rebuild everything in world and their dependencies. Once you have > > done, you will have daemons still running the old code, which you could > > fix with a reboot, or you could run checkrestart and restart only the > > affected programs. Ah, that is what I thought. > > After an emerge -e world, a reboot is probably best, another > > reason to avoid the unnecessary step of emerge -e world in the > > first place. This conflict what others have said. Curious. My take is that since I updated the major compiler, gcc, it warrants an --emptytree rebuild and reboot, just to be safe. It's a workstation, not a server, so it's time for a reboot, imho. > After I do a major upgrade or --emptytree, I switch to boot runlevel, > check with checkrestart and restart whatever it reports needs it. > Generally, switching to boot runlevel catches most everything. OK, so I emerge checkrestart and ran it. And there are almost a dozen things it says need a reboot (mostly lxde). "These processes do not seem to have an associated init script to restart them". So I have to reboot anyways. Oh, the url on the "checkrestart" script now points to some advertisement that is unrelated, to a bug needs to be file to the github location? I did not know if this is the best new link, so I did not file this bug on checkrestart. ******************* > Yea, rebooting may be faster but I hate rebooting all the time. :/ Agreeded. But after a gcc update, I think it wise, especially since gcc-4.9 cometh....soon? > Dale thx, James