On Mon, 28 Oct 2002 07:30:25 -0500 (EST) Stew Benedict <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, Marcel Pol wrote: > > I was wondering if there's a plan for gcc-2.95. > > On 9.0 for x86 there's gcc-2.96, which compiles mozilla. For 9.1 on ppc, > > will there be a gcc-2.95 which will compile mozilla? > > I built a gcc-2.95 rpm for myself, to compile coda, and it coexists with > > gcc-3.2 here. It works for me, but it's not set up to use > > /etc/alternatives. If there's interest I could post the specfile, and > > maybe update it to use/etc/alternatives from the gcc-2.96 rpm. > > > > This is for Java compatibility? I had hoped that Blackdown might move to > gcc3.2 with everone else, but I see the PPC port hasn't been updated since > March. Sure, if you've got is co-existing that would be great, so far it > hasn't been purged from the source tree. I'm not into Java that much, but yes, Mozilla is compiled with gcc-2.9x for the java plugin. The specfile is here: http://www.chaosmongers.org/linux/gcc2.95.spec http://www.chaosmongers.org/linux/gcc2.95.spec.diff I was a bit unsure about the provides options. I would have chosen to have a "Provides: gcc = 2.95". But I checked 2.96, and it just "Provides: gcc2.96 = 2.96". Also, I didn't use /etc/alternatives yet. Is there really a wish for? I felt a bit lazy, like; it might get dropped in a few months, even before 9.1, and then it's for nothing. I'm not really a gcc guru, so if you have the time for it, check the diff on the old specfile, and see if it's all ok to you. -- Marcel Pol Linux 2.4.19-16.ringworld-mdk, up 1 day, 2:11 Registered User #163523
