gcc-2.9x & gcc-3.3x peacfully coinciding?

[Net Llama!]

On Mon, 7 Jul 2003, Bill Campbell wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 01:46:42PM -0400, Net Llama! wrote:
> >I'm attempting to parse how to safely build & install gcc-3.3 so that it
> >will peacefull coincide with gcc-2.96.  What i'm not understanding is how
> >to do it.  If i do a normal build/install of gcc-3.3, isn't it going to
> >overwrite the pre-existing version unless i install it somewhere
> >non-traditional?  And if i install it somewhere non-traditional, how do i
> >allow make to use it for future builds?
>
> There's a build option in gcc to have it build in its own directory so
> that's out of the way when you don't want to use it.
>
> We've been using the openpkg.org packaging system which builds it as gcc2
> so it's as easy as saying CC=gcc2.

Couldn't i just rename the gcc binary to be gcc2?  Even if i did that, i'd
still run into problems when rebuilding SRPMs (which i do quite a lot).
I'd have to edit the SPEC file all the time to set CC=gcc2.

Is there any reason to keep the old version of gcc around, other than for
the random stuff that still won't buld right on gcc-3.x?

-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Lonni J Friedman				netllama at linux-sxs.org
Linux Step-by-step & TyGeMo		     http://netllama.ipfox.com