Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gcc 5.3

2016-01-01 Thread lee
Paul Colquhoun writes: > On Wed, 30 Dec 2015 17:32:44 lee wrote: >> Neil Bothwick writes: >> > On Tue, 29 Dec 2015 19:21:01 +0100, lee wrote: > [...] >> >> So if I'd never explicitly update everything but run emerge --sync >> >> frequently,

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gcc 5.3

2016-01-01 Thread Stefan G. Weichinger
On 12/26/2015 06:44 AM, Paul Colquhoun wrote: > Yes, using gcc-5.3.0 to recompile 5.3.0 with +jit worked. Doing the same right now. Does JIT make any difference yet when I recompile something with a JIT-enabled gcc? Does any code in current gentoo actually use that already?

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gcc 5.3

2015-12-30 Thread lee
Neil Bothwick writes: > On Tue, 29 Dec 2015 19:21:01 +0100, lee wrote: > >> > As 4.9.3 is marked stable, I guess that's what'd you get per >> > default. >> >> 4.8.5 >> >> I'd have to run emerge --sync to know about more recent versions. How >> is that supposed to be

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gcc 5.3

2015-12-30 Thread Paul Colquhoun
On Wed, 30 Dec 2015 17:32:44 lee wrote: > Neil Bothwick writes: > > On Tue, 29 Dec 2015 19:21:01 +0100, lee wrote: > >> > As 4.9.3 is marked stable, I guess that's what'd you get per > >> > default. > >> > >> 4.8.5 > >> > >> I'd have to run emerge --sync to know about more

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gcc 5.3

2015-12-29 Thread lee
David Haller writes: > Hello, > > On Tue, 29 Dec 2015, lee wrote: >>Andrew Savchenko writes: >>> There will be no 5.3.1 likely. Numeration scheme is changed from 5.x >>> series: what was middle version is now major, what was minor is now >>> middle. So 5.3

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gcc 5.3

2015-12-29 Thread Neil Bothwick
On Tue, 29 Dec 2015 19:21:01 +0100, lee wrote: > > As 4.9.3 is marked stable, I guess that's what'd you get per > > default. > > 4.8.5 > > I'd have to run emerge --sync to know about more recent versions. How > is that supposed to be used, btw? I only run that when I do want to > update

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gcc 5.3

2015-12-29 Thread David Haller
Hello, On Tue, 29 Dec 2015, lee wrote: >Andrew Savchenko writes: >> There will be no 5.3.1 likely. Numeration scheme is changed from 5.x >> series: what was middle version is now major, what was minor is now >> middle. So 5.3 is a patch version of 5.0 the same as 4.9.3 is a

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gcc 5.3

2015-12-29 Thread lee
Andrew Savchenko writes: > On Fri, 25 Dec 2015 12:40:48 -0800 walt wrote: >> On Thu, 24 Dec 2015 10:18:27 -0500 >> Alan Grimes wrote: >> >> > Hey, thanks for putting out gcc 5.3... >> > >> > Unfortunately, it fails to bootstrap on my machine. I am

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gcc 5.3

2015-12-28 Thread Andrew Savchenko
On Fri, 25 Dec 2015 12:40:48 -0800 walt wrote: > On Thu, 24 Dec 2015 10:18:27 -0500 > Alan Grimes wrote: > > > Hey, thanks for putting out gcc 5.3... > > > > Unfortunately, it fails to bootstrap on my machine. I am getting > > differences between the stage 2 and stage 3

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gcc 5.3

2015-12-26 Thread David Haller
Hello, On Fri, 25 Dec 2015, walt wrote: >On Thu, 24 Dec 2015 10:18:27 -0500 >Alan Grimes wrote: > >> Hey, thanks for putting out gcc 5.3... >> >> Unfortunately, it fails to bootstrap on my machine. I am getting >> differences between the stage 2 and stage 3 compilers and

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gcc 5.3

2015-12-26 Thread Philip Webb
151225 walt wrote: > You can work around the failure by installing 5.3.0 > with the -jit useflag (which should succeed) and *then* switch to 5.3.0 > using gcc-config before re-installing 5.3.0 with +jit. So this is one of the 50 % cases where USE="-* ... " helps (smile). --

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gcc 5.3

2015-12-25 Thread Paul Colquhoun
On Sat, 26 Dec 2015 14:00:55 Paul Colquhoun wrote: > On Fri, 25 Dec 2015 12:40:48 walt wrote: > > On Thu, 24 Dec 2015 10:18:27 -0500 > > > > Alan Grimes wrote: > > > Hey, thanks for putting out gcc 5.3... > > > > > > Unfortunately, it fails to bootstrap on my machine. I am

[gentoo-user] Re: Gcc 5.3

2015-12-25 Thread walt
On Thu, 24 Dec 2015 10:18:27 -0500 Alan Grimes wrote: > Hey, thanks for putting out gcc 5.3... > > Unfortunately, it fails to bootstrap on my machine. I am getting > differences between the stage 2 and stage 3 compilers and it's > dying... =( I'm waiting for 5.3.1 before

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gcc 5.3

2015-12-25 Thread Paul Colquhoun
On Fri, 25 Dec 2015 12:40:48 walt wrote: > On Thu, 24 Dec 2015 10:18:27 -0500 > > Alan Grimes wrote: > > Hey, thanks for putting out gcc 5.3... > > > > Unfortunately, it fails to bootstrap on my machine. I am getting > > differences between the stage 2 and stage 3