On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 16:50:24 +0100 Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > Am Freitag, 14. November 2014, 15:49:17 schrieb Andrew Savchenko: > > On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 09:08:17 -0500 Michael Orlitzky wrote: > > > Question 1: is it desirable to e.g. switch compilers, compile systemd, > > > and then switch back? > > > > This is definitely a good idea. Some packages are picky about gcc > > versions, e.g. dev-util/nvidia-cuda-toolkit usually lags behind the > > latest available gcc version by one. > > E.g. cmake may fail to run correctly if it is built with a newer compiler > than > the one currently selected. Or so I remember from a bug some time ago.
There are packages (or more precisely combinations of packages and use flags) for which there is no other way to build them. They need older gcc and they build fine with it. So the question is whether users will struggle themselves or PMS will support this in a friendly way. Please note, I'm not talking about gcc dynamic version switch for each package in portage. Only small number of them needs this and if some of this little set will experience gcc-downgrade related bug (e.g. cmake bug mentioned above), IMHO this should be handled separately. Best regards, Andrew Savchenko
pgpw4cmsj8noW.pgp
Description: PGP signature
