Re: [gentoo-dev] why does gcc-3.4.x depend on gcc-3.3.x / libstdc++?
On Sat, 2005-08-27 at 02:46 +0200, Bjarke Istrup Pedersen wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I must say I have been wondering about this for a while too. A solution might be add some sort of flag to packages that are binary, and then let portage install libstdc++ the first time you install this kind of package. You're right. We could even make it a dependency based on the gcc version. Wouldn't that be neat? Maybe something like this: || ( =gcc-3.3* libstdc++-v3 ) For the humor impaired, this was a joke. Why is it a joke? Because you're missing the non-binary packages that this completely breaks. Want a cool, small example? Install gcc 3.3, configure it as your primary compiler, emerge fluxbox, upgrade to gcc 3.4 and remove all traces of gcc 3.3 and libstdc++-v3, then try running fluxbox. Basically, vapier got tired of all of the my $foo package is broken bugs because people didn't realize that anything that linked against the older gcc would *require* being recompiled to work properly. The solution? Add this library by default. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead/QA Manager Games - Developer Gentoo Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] why does gcc-3.4.x depend on gcc-3.3.x / libstdc++?
maillog: 27/08/2005-02:46:03(+0200): Bjarke Istrup Pedersen types I must say I have been wondering about this for a while too. A solution might be add some sort of flag to packages that are binary, and then let portage install libstdc++ the first time you install this kind of package. You mean, like have binary packages depend on virtual/libstdc++-SOMEVERSION and have virtual/libstdc++ provided by gcc or the split-out libstdc++ ebuild? Mike Frysinger skrev: On Fri, Aug 26, 2005 at 10:14:04AM +0100, Chris Bainbridge wrote: Subject says it all - is there any reason why 3.4.4 installs either gcc-3.3* or libstdc++-v3 built with gcc-3.3? because i got tired of people complaining about broken systems when they emerged gcc-3.4.4 and cleaned out all gcc-3.3.x versions from their system Is it possible to compile a native 3.4 system without the old gcc if I don't need binary compatibility? i just add libstdc++-v3 to my package.provided in /etc/portage/profile/ and call it a day i dont really see there being a clean solution until we have portage support to track ABI dependencies -mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list -- \Georgi Georgiev \ Professor: This is gonna be one hell of a \ /[EMAIL PROTECTED] / bowel movement. Afterwards, he'll be lucky/ \ +81(90)2877-8845 \ if he has any bones left.\ pgpsPIa2KADCP.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] why does gcc-3.4.x depend on gcc-3.3.x / libstdc++?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Bjarke Istrup Pedersen wrote: I must say I have been wondering about this for a while too. A solution might be add some sort of flag to packages that are binary, and then let portage install libstdc++ the first time you install this kind of package. This does not solve the following problem: 1. user upgrades to gcc-3.4.x 2. gcc-config to 3.4.x 3. emerge -P gcc Because libstdc++ has a different name (.6) in 3.4.x than the .5 in 3.3.X all the packages linked against the old one are borked and this includes python meaning that emerge does not work until you for example make a symlink from the .6 to .5. I recently run into this when reinstalling my desktop after a broken hard drive. Regards, Petteri Räty (Betelgeuse) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFDEHpTcxLzpIGCsLQRAoOLAJwPpe3od7YvvqpQQkFE5zKbvEQgQQCdG7KG f07PYC8yAD+EJuBzyjT7cX8= =Trg6 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] why does gcc-3.4.x depend on gcc-3.3.x / libstdc++?
Subject says it all - is there any reason why 3.4.4 installs either gcc-3.3* or libstdc++-v3 built with gcc-3.3? Is it possible to compile a native 3.4 system without the old gcc if I don't need binary compatibility? -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] why does gcc-3.4.x depend on gcc-3.3.x / libstdc++?
On Fri, Aug 26, 2005 at 10:14:04AM +0100, Chris Bainbridge wrote: Subject says it all - is there any reason why 3.4.4 installs either gcc-3.3* or libstdc++-v3 built with gcc-3.3? because i got tired of people complaining about broken systems when they emerged gcc-3.4.4 and cleaned out all gcc-3.3.x versions from their system Is it possible to compile a native 3.4 system without the old gcc if I don't need binary compatibility? i just add libstdc++-v3 to my package.provided in /etc/portage/profile/ and call it a day i dont really see there being a clean solution until we have portage support to track ABI dependencies -mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] why does gcc-3.4.x depend on gcc-3.3.x / libstdc++?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I must say I have been wondering about this for a while too. A solution might be add some sort of flag to packages that are binary, and then let portage install libstdc++ the first time you install this kind of package. Mike Frysinger skrev: On Fri, Aug 26, 2005 at 10:14:04AM +0100, Chris Bainbridge wrote: Subject says it all - is there any reason why 3.4.4 installs either gcc-3.3* or libstdc++-v3 built with gcc-3.3? because i got tired of people complaining about broken systems when they emerged gcc-3.4.4 and cleaned out all gcc-3.3.x versions from their system Is it possible to compile a native 3.4 system without the old gcc if I don't need binary compatibility? i just add libstdc++-v3 to my package.provided in /etc/portage/profile/ and call it a day i dont really see there being a clean solution until we have portage support to track ABI dependencies -mike -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFDD7fLO+Ewtpi9rLERAi3NAJsEKnxeVaCrJUl6dSvaU1zP3J4OpwCgxa5v HfmJvCp8XDXDYAyFpYDoNu0= =bV8B -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
