marko writes: > On Sun, Oct 14, 2001 at 10:26:37AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: > > marko writes: > > > As in subject: I think that cc and gcc should be provided > > > through update-alternatives mechanism, so user could > > > switch between gcc272, gcc-2.95 and gcc-3.0 more easily. > > > > > > Eg. use gcc-3.0 for cc but gcc-2.95 for gcc or whatever... > > > > gcc-3.0 doesn't use alternatives to make sure that the preferred > > system compiler is used when calling 'gcc'. If you want to test > > gcc-3.0 for a particular package, > > 'preferred' by whom? I think that this should be controlled by > sysadmin. The whole 'alternatives' system for making easy > for sysadmin to change defaults. Why gcc is exception?
ld and as are exceptions as well. use the system compiler to build libfoo, change the system compiler to gcc-3.0, recompile libfoo (which now depends on libgcc1), upload this package, you'll get the mess. > > - use CC=gcc-3.0 CXX=g++-3.0 when configuring/compiling a package > > Yeah, I know that. > > > - make ~<user>/bin/gcc a symlink to gcc-3.0 and add it to your path > > But if I want to do that on system level? use dpkg-divert