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

[Net Llama!]

On Mon, 7 Jul 2003, Kurt Wall wrote:
> Quoth Net Llama!:
> > On Mon, 7 Jul 2003, Kurt Wall wrote:
> > >
> > > If you do ./configure, the new one will go into /usr/local and you
> > > won't break anything. To get it used for future builds, invoke the
> > > new GCC using the full path:
>
> [...]
>
> > OK, so how would i control which one gets used by default when i'm , say,
> > rebuilding an SRPM?  I'm guessing that i'd have to edit the SPEC file?
>
> Manipulate your PATH so the new gets found first. Or, hack your
> $HOME/.rpmrc file to find the new compiler - I guess, I don't use

Is it glaringly obvious when something isn't able to be built with
gcc-3.x?  Does the build just fail, or is there a chance that i could get
a broken binary?

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