Update GCC from 2.95.2: 2.95.3, 3.1.1, or 3.2?

[Tim Wunder]

On Thursday 19 September 2002 09:50 pm, Jerry McBride wrote:
> Tim,
>
> If you suspect your gcc or glibc  is broken in some manor... what makes you
> think you can recompiled a new version and produce a correctly working
> copy?
>

I've compiled gcc-2.95.3 and it works. And the gcc compile process is s'posed 
to be smart enough to account for "broken" gcc's. It compiles the new gcc 
with the old gcc in stage1. In stage 2, gcc is rebuilt with the gcc built in 
stage 1, in stage 3, gcc is built with the new gcc in stage2. Stage2 and 
stage3 files are then compared. 

> My advice is... go back to the distribution cd, re-install all that you
> suspect is broken. If you reinstall glibc, it's best to shutdown and
> restart before you do much else with your setup...
>

I'm gonna try gcc3.2 first. Call me crazy...

> That said, I found the kde 2.2.2 source tarballs at ftp.rutgers.org. If any
> one here needs or would like a complete copy, just ask.
>

glad to hear it

> I'm recompiling the sources with the newer objprelink-2 and using the
> combreloc of ld... this ought to be a pretty fast binary, even on very old
> hardware. I hope... :')
>

Tim

-- 
Caldera eWorkstation 3.1+, kernel 2.4.18-preempt, KDE 3.0.3, Xfree86 4.1.0
  8:00pm  up  5:29,  5 users,  load average: 0.52, 0.71, 0.98
It's what you learn AFTER you know it all that counts