Per, Depending on which system I use, it could take several days at least. The image I have at Marist College is running on VM, and is capped very low so as not to interfere with production work. It took me most of one day to build Openssl 0.9.6g.
Mark Post -----Original Message----- From: Per Jessen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 6:21 AM To: Post, Mark K; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: new devtools not building on linux/390 > -----Original Message----- > From: Post, Mark K [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2002 4:51 PM > > That's really not acceptable. :( To suddenly throw in a requirement to > upgrade to a relatively new compiler (particularly for Linux/390) based on > something you "heard" is very aggravating. For me to even get gcc 3.1 built > will take about a week (working on it part time, if I get the time) or more, > assuming I can find the disk space to hold it all. Hi Mark, I tend to agree with you, but I have also seen how much SAPDB relies on the size of a bool being 1 byte. I also have a problem with disk space for building gcc 3.1, but other than that, well - if gcc31 will make SAPDB compile on Linux/390, then I'll take it. Note - you can have concurrent installs of a mix of gcc versions - and only use gcc31 for SAPDB. As for using a "relatively new" compiler for SAPDB only - I can live with it :-) Now let's see where I've got some DASD hidden away ... regards, Per Jessen, Zurich PS: would it really take 1 week to build gcc 3.1 for you ? I've built gcc 2.95.x on old 486 machines - still only took about 12 hours (I think - definitely less than 24) _______________________________________________ sapdb.general mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://listserv.sap.com/mailman/listinfo/sapdb.general
