Martin Man wrote: > Tim Spriggs wrote: >> Martin Man wrote: >>> upstream will not help us here, as this is solaris specific problem, >>> only as soon as the sunwspro will be packaged for let's say ubuntu, >>> then >>> the conflict with binutils will become apparent enough to be treated >>> important... until then we have to cope with it in nexenta... >>> HTH, >>> Martin >>> >> I figured it might be difficult, as long as there is a clean way >> around it I am happy. I was really hoping to avoid >> patching/recompiling the gcc stuff :) > don't worry, from my experience you don't need to touch conflicting > packages, only the one that is yours (sunwspro) and you can influence > how it will behave on the system wrt/ conflicting packages. After looking into them, diversions seem like a true hack. The potential for multiple diversions to interfere is there and with three packages that want to claim a file there is no way to establish priority. In looking a little further, on my Debian Linux box:
> apt-file search c89 ... gcc: usr/bin/c89-gcc gcc: usr/share/man/man1/c89-gcc.1.gz ... >update-alternatives --display c89 c89 - status is auto. link currently points to /usr/bin/c89-gcc /usr/bin/c89-gcc - priority 20 slave c89.1.gz: /usr/share/man/man1/c89-gcc.1.gz Current `best' version is /usr/bin/c89-gcc. >apt-cache show gcc | grep ^Version Version: 4:4.1.2-3 Version: 4:4.1.1-15 It appears that this problem is solved with a newer version of gcc. If I recompile the gcc 4.1.? source from ubuntu sources, can it be included in the main source tree? Are there patches that already exist for this package? The maintainer is listed as "Debian GCC Maintainers (plus email address)". -Tim _______________________________________________ gnusol-devel mailing list gnusol-devel@lists.sonic.net http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/gnusol-devel
