Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: stable gcc 5.4.0 ??

2017-04-21 18:21 GMT+02:00 Jörg Schaible : > Walter Dnes wrote: > > > On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 05:52:20PM -0500, Matthias Maier wrote > > > >> (A-C) gcc-5.4.0 and gcc-4.9.4 are slotted separately. What is going to > >> be the default is entirely up to you. > > > > Good to

[gentoo-dev] Re: Re: stable gcc 5.4.0 ??

Walter Dnes wrote: > On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 05:52:20PM -0500, Matthias Maier wrote > >> (A-C) gcc-5.4.0 and gcc-4.9.4 are slotted separately. What is going to >> be the default is entirely up to you. > > Good to hear. Like I said, on a fresh install I'd go with the current > version (5.4).

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: stable gcc 5.4.0 ??

On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 3:12 PM, Jörg Schaible < joerg.schai...@bpm-inspire.com> wrote: > Tomas Mozes wrote: > > [snip] > > > As mentioned by others, bugs on packages.gentoo.org will not affect your > > portage tree. I've just installed gcc 5.4.0-r3 on amd64, so try syncing > > your portage tree.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: stable gcc 5.4.0 ??

On 2017-04-18 14:27, James Le Cuirot wrote: > On Tue, 18 Apr 2017 15:12:13 +0200 > Jörg Schaible wrote: > > > As said, I synced the tree twice this morning (4 hours ago) and the > > KEYWORDS in the ebuild do not declare amd64 as stable although it was > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: stable gcc 5.4.0 ??

On Tue, 18 Apr 2017 15:12:13 +0200 Jörg Schaible wrote: > As said, I synced the tree twice this morning (4 hours ago) and the > KEYWORDS in the ebuild do not declare amd64 as stable although it was > committed to GIT already yesterday. And this is no wonder,

[gentoo-dev] Re: Re: stable gcc 5.4.0 ??

Tomas Mozes wrote: [snip] > As mentioned by others, bugs on packages.gentoo.org will not affect your > portage tree. I've just installed gcc 5.4.0-r3 on amd64, so try syncing > your portage tree. Don't you have it in your package.mask? As said, I synced the tree twice this morning (4 hours ago)