On 9/18/2002 9:48 AM, someone claiming to be Net Llama! wrote: > On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, Tim Wunder wrote: > >> OK, Caldera eW3.1 base install (but I guess by now it's a far cry >> from that...) with updated kernel 2.4.18 with preepmt patch, and >> glibc 2.2.5. I've been having a persnickety atexit problem with >> many of the programs I've been trying to compile of late and my >> latest information tells me that a likely fix is an upgrade of gcc. >> I currently have gcc-2.95.2 as provided by Caldera for their >> eW3.1.1 product. So, my question is: Should I update to gcc 3.2, >> 3.1.1 or stick with the 2.95.x tree and use 2.95.3? > > > Tim, could you fix your wordwrap, its set to something like 500 right
Actually, it was set to 0, which *used* to be fine with Mozilla <=1.1, apparently that's no longer true with Mozilla >=1.2a > now. Anyhoo, this really depends on whether you want bleeding edge or > stable. Right now there is no compelling reason to go to ta 3.x > version of gcc, othe than just because. 2.95.3 or 2.96.x (for those > using redhat) is considered the latest stable release. > > 'cept I have an Athlon and 3.x has optimizations for it. I'll be trying 3.1.1. From what I've been reading, it should be fine. >> I suppose I *could* install multiple compilers and figger this out >> on my own, but I was hoping someone with more experience would >> offer a clue. I'm leaning toward trying 3.1.1. >> >> Thanks, Tim >> >> PS There doesn't appear to be a Step on updating gcc. Is there one >> tucked away somewhere that I just can't find? The instructions on >> the gnu site are, um, thorough (ly confusing...) > > > If there is one, i'm not aware of it. I tend to rebuild SRPMs for > this sorta thing. > _______________________________________________ Linux-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe/Suspend/Etc -> http://www.linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-users
