DJ Lucas wrote: > Bruce Dubbs wrote: >> Do you want to consider gcc-4.1? >> >> http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.1/ > > > May I beg and plea for a good, healthy HELL NO? :-) With previous > release history, regressions have been a pain...wait until at least > 4.1.1 or 4.1.2 even to let the dust settle a bit (obviously I mean for > release, 4.1.0 is good for devel so we can figure it out ahead of time). > OOo-1.1.4 suffered from 3.3-3.4.x regressions (real compiler bugs, not > code problems with the version change)...it had to sit and wait until > the second round of 3.4 fixes (3.4.2) before dropping the heavy gcc-3.3 > dep. Although I never tested 4.0.0, 4.0.1 was okay. 4.0.0 would be > interesting to see if the current instructions work when I have some > time to blow.
Do you realize that lfs-devel has 4.0.2 now? In any case, I couldn't find a 4.1 tarball and did a svn checkout of the 4.1 branch. I'm doing a make bootstrap now and I'll follow with a make check to see the test results. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
