On Tue, 11 Oct 2005, Brandin Creech wrote:
Now that gcc4 is out (and will be in the next LFS stable release), I'm wondering--is it necessary (or a good idea, even) to keep a copy of some gcc3 version. What about gcc2--is it necessary to keep that (assuming we're Linux 2.6)?
Declan has already dealt with gcc-2.95.3, but I'll offer you my view of gcc-3. On x86 (and, theoretically, on ppc32) it might be useful to have a recent version of gcc-3.3 to run binary packages (see chapter 12 of blfs svn).
For anything most people are likely to compile, patches exist if the package doesn't build. Finding patches for non-blfs packages can be interesting, you might become rather more familiar than you wanted to be with the contents of gentoo's ebuilds, and with various SRPMs (use an rpm2cpio script for theses, with cpio). But unless you are using really old things, gcc4.0 hasn't caused a lot of grief. So, slim down your build and drop gcc3.
Ken -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce
-- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
