On Mon, 7 Jul 2003, Bill Campbell wrote: > On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 01:46:42PM -0400, Net Llama! wrote: > >I'm attempting to parse how to safely build & install gcc-3.3 so that it > >will peacefull coincide with gcc-2.96. What i'm not understanding is how > >to do it. If i do a normal build/install of gcc-3.3, isn't it going to > >overwrite the pre-existing version unless i install it somewhere > >non-traditional? And if i install it somewhere non-traditional, how do i > >allow make to use it for future builds? > > There's a build option in gcc to have it build in its own directory so > that's out of the way when you don't want to use it. > > We've been using the openpkg.org packaging system which builds it as gcc2 > so it's as easy as saying CC=gcc2.
Couldn't i just rename the gcc binary to be gcc2? Even if i did that, i'd still run into problems when rebuilding SRPMs (which i do quite a lot). I'd have to edit the SPEC file all the time to set CC=gcc2. Is there any reason to keep the old version of gcc around, other than for the random stuff that still won't buld right on gcc-3.x? -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Lonni J Friedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Linux Step-by-step & TyGeMo http://netllama.ipfox.com _______________________________________________ Linux-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe/Suspend/Etc -> http://www.linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-users
