Petr Ovtchenkov writes: > Well, really I treat this as question to package maintainers of gcc: I know > only about 'official' > releases of gcc. 'Official' > > bash-3.1$ gcc -v > Using built-in specs. > Target: i686-pc-linux-gnu > Configured with: ../gcc-4.1.1/configure --prefix=/opt/gcc-4.1.1 > --libexecdir=/usr/local/lib --enable-shared --enable-threads=posix > --enable-__cxa_atexit --enable-clocale=gnu --enable-languages=c,c++ > Thread model: posix > gcc version 4.1.1 > > give me correct results. Then see the difference between 4.1.1-5 and > 4.1.1-11: this is package maintainer's area.
so what did you test, the upstream release, -5, and -11? Just to be sure, that/if 4.1.1-5 works. > Here you say about 4.1.1-*, but in attached log I see c++ (GCC) 4.1.2 > 20060814 (prerelease) (Debian 4.1.1-11)... > Ah, wonderful mystification! Masquerade 4.1.2 prerelease (build from current > gcc SVN?) by 4.1.1-11! > I think this is question to gcc team before release happens. there's nothing masqueraded, as you see in the gcc version number, which includes the package version as well. The changes are mentioned in the changelog as well. surely you can upload a new upstream tarball to the archives each time now that we have the possibility to use version numbers like 4.1.2~20060814-11, but that would be just a duplocated orig.tar.gz. > One more question to you: > > c++ -pthread -fexceptions -fident -O2 -g -fuse-cxa-atexit -D_REENTRANT > -I../../../stlport -c -o .... > > I see you made modification of build: -O2 -g both in force, while I prefer > either -O2 (release-shared) or -g (dbg-shared) or > -g -D_STLP_DEBUG (stldbg-shared). it's Debian policy to build with -O2 -g. Matthias -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
