Alexander E. Patrakov wrote these words on 04/25/05 21:19 CST: > Randy McMurchy wrote: >>Regardless, I suppose I don't understand the need to keep a compiler >>around in the BLFS book because there are some obscure packages out >>there that cannot compile with current versions of GCC. > > They are non-free. One cannot compile them at all, they just require > libstdc++.so.5 at runtime.
To me, even more reason to ditch the old compiler. My understanding is that this is a Linux From Scratch project. Providing support for non-free binary packages doesn't fall into the project's goals. Perhaps, I'm being too short-sighted, but providing support for non-free binary packages just seems like something we could avoid and still meet the project's goals. -- Randy rmlscsi: [GNU ld version 2.15.94.0.2 20041220] [gcc (GCC) 3.4.3] [GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.4] [Linux 2.6.10 i686] 21:27:00 up 23 days, 21:00, 2 users, load average: 0.00, 0.02, 0.00 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
