ladislav.danko at acsnet.sk
Fri Nov 8 01:22:44 PST 2002
On Thursday 07 November 2002 18:45, Jeroen Coumans wrote:
> On Thursday 07 November 2002 09:37, Ladislav Danko wrote:
> > On Wednesday 06 November 2002 19:08, Jeroen Coumans wrote:
> > > You mean 2.96.x. The only time that version ever gave trouble was
> > > in RH-7.0. But the 2.95.x release is STILL available in RH (and
> > > even installed by default IIRC) so this shouldn't stop you from
> > > preventing
> > are you sure?
> > $> gcc -v
> > Reading specs from
> > /usr/i386-glibc21-linux/lib/gcc-lib/i386-redhat-linux/2.96/specs
> > gcc driver version 2.96 20000731 (Red Hat Linux 7.3 2.96-110)
> > executing gcc version egcs-2.91.66
> > $>
> > -the same in rh7.2 (and i don't know how in rh7.0), so i'm not so
> > sure about gcc2.95.x in rh's7.x distros.
> It's there but it's called differently (kgcc ??). I would refer to
> the archives since lots of people have reported problems with RH7.x
> and everytime someone stepped in and said, hey, just change the link
> from gcc to <kgcc>. Working from memory here so please apply grain of
> salt before taking too seriously...
hmmm, on rh7.3 it says this:
$> which kgcc
$> kgcc -v
Reading specs from /usr/lib/gcc-lib/i386-redhat-linux/egcs-2.91.66/specs
gcc version egcs-2.91.66 19990314/Linux (egcs-1.1.2 release)
so my question is, how differencies are between egcc-2.91.66 and gcc
2.95.3, hope question on this will be helpfull for many people using
> > anyway, i wouldn't like making flame, but i hope the best way
> > prevent yourself from problems is using official gnu gcc versions
> > of compilers.
> For LFS, definitely. That's why we bootstrap twice. No flames meant.
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-support' in the subject header of the message
More information about the lfs-support