On Sun, Sep 11, 2005 at 03:27:11PM +0200, K?vesd?n G?bor wrote: > Kris Kennaway wrote: > > >On Sat, Sep 10, 2005 at 01:41:15PM +0200, K?vesd?n G?bor wrote: > > > > > >>Hello, > >> > >>I have two issues with selecting the appropriate version of gcc: > >> > >>1, There is the port net/verlihub, that needs gcc 3.3 that is broken > >>under amd64. What solution do You recommend? > >> > >> > > > >You could try it with the system compiler, but chances are it depends > >on gcc 3.3 because later versions cannot compile it (they are stricter > >about the conforming code they will compile, particularly C++) > > > > > I've tried it, but unfortunately it fails. If I download the official > tarball and try to compile that, it succeeds, however. Accordingly, I > think the port can be fixed to compile with the stock compiler, but > unfortunately I can't figure out what the problem is.
Talk to the port maintainer or developers. > >>2, There are gcc snapshots in the ports collection like lang/gcc34, > >>lang/gcc40, lang/gcc41, but there aren't releaes, just snapshots. Are > >>these gcc snapshots as reliable as the releases are? Can I use for > >>instance lang/gcc34 for production goals instead of the stock compiler, > >>or is it just for development/testing usage? > >> > >> > > > >Not for building world, but you can use them for your own purposes. > > > > > > > But if these aren't so reliable as the gcc releases are, why don't we > have the releases in the ports collection instead of the snapshots? Or > has anybody thought of porting the official releases as lang/gcc401 or > something like that? Ditto. Kris
pgpbtcqZry5fw.pgp
Description: PGP signature
