Re: gcc-3.4/4.0 dumb question
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Goswin von Brederlow writes: [cut] Nothing to be sure to get rid of any interfering package. You could filter out any arch:all and any non C/c++ package I guess. But is that worth it? Maybe the compiled python scripts were created with a miscompiled python and are damaged? Or any other it's possible, of course, but I didn't notice any problem so far (except when qt were broken, but they were fixed later on) sideeffect of using gcc-4.0 to build the debs. The speed of your connection also shouldn't matter as long as you don't pay by the minute. Just download the stuff overnight(s). Your of course I pay by the minute, otherwise I wouldn't have sent these mails :( system is working now or not? So no hurry to switch. my system is working fine, but I can't install new packages, eg. -dev packages that I need to compile some stuff. same I here. I still have few -gcc4 packages. If you need to install some -dev packages re-install their dependencies only from pure64 and then try to install -dev, it worked for me. I just downloaded required packages manually and used dpkg to install "downgrade" gcc4 versions; I am not sure if it is 'right way' but worked for me. Haroon -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: gcc-3.4/4.0 dumb question
Goswin von Brederlow writes: [cut] Nothing to be sure to get rid of any interfering package. You could filter out any arch:all and any non C/c++ package I guess. But is that worth it? Maybe the compiled python scripts were created with a miscompiled python and are damaged? Or any other it's possible, of course, but I didn't notice any problem so far (except when qt were broken, but they were fixed later on) sideeffect of using gcc-4.0 to build the debs. The speed of your connection also shouldn't matter as long as you don't pay by the minute. Just download the stuff overnight(s). Your of course I pay by the minute, otherwise I wouldn't have sent these mails :( system is working now or not? So no hurry to switch. my system is working fine, but I can't install new packages, eg. -dev packages that I need to compile some stuff. MfG Goswin PS: I used to have a 56K modem so I feel for you. :) c. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: gcc-3.4/4.0 dumb question
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Goswin von Brederlow writes: > [cut] >>> What should I do now ? >>> should I wait until the new gcc-4.0 tree is built? >>> or should I use the standard "pure64" tree? > [cut] >> If you have to ask then you should reinstall using the standard tree, >> which uses gcc-3.3. > > isn't there any better solution than reinstalling everything? > It would take a lot of time, since I don't have a fast connection at home. > (not to mention that gcc-4.0 compiled binaries are faster) > > thanks > > > c. Nothing to be sure to get rid of any interfering package. You could filter out any arch:all and any non C/c++ package I guess. But is that worth it? Maybe the compiled python scripts were created with a miscompiled python and are damaged? Or any other sideeffect of using gcc-4.0 to build the debs. The speed of your connection also shouldn't matter as long as you don't pay by the minute. Just download the stuff overnight(s). Your system is working now or not? So no hurry to switch. MfG Goswin PS: I used to have a 56K modem so I feel for you. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: gcc-3.4/4.0 dumb question
Goswin von Brederlow writes: [cut] What should I do now ? should I wait until the new gcc-4.0 tree is built? or should I use the standard "pure64" tree? [cut] If you have to ask then you should reinstall using the standard tree, which uses gcc-3.3. isn't there any better solution than reinstalling everything? It would take a lot of time, since I don't have a fast connection at home. (not to mention that gcc-4.0 compiled binaries are faster) thanks c. -- . -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: gcc-3.4/4.0 dumb question
El miÃ, 27-04-2005 a las 18:13 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribiÃ: > I didn't understand what I'm supposed to do. > I've been using gcc-3.4/4.0 sid for a long time on my laptop. > > What should I do now ? > should I wait until the new gcc-4.0 tree is built? > or should I use the standard "pure64" tree? If you don't mind the occasional instability and can live without it (i.e., your laptop is not your production environment), then go ahead and stay with gcc-4.0 if you like. Otherwise, you are encouraged to switch to pure64. > what compiler is pure64 compiled with? 3.3 or 3.4? Mostly 3.3, which is the standard compiler for sarge/sid. However, a few important packages that don't work properly with 3.3 are being compiled with 3.4 (namely, mozilla and derivatives). Greetings, -- Javier Kohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ICQ: blashyrkh #2361802 Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: gcc-3.4/4.0 dumb question
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > I didn't understand what I'm supposed to do. > I've been using gcc-3.4/4.0 sid for a long time on my laptop. > > What should I do now ? > should I wait until the new gcc-4.0 tree is built? > or should I use the standard "pure64" tree? > > what compiler is pure64 compiled with? 3.3 or 3.4? > > thanks in advance > > c. If you have to ask then you should reinstall using the standard tree, which uses gcc-3.3. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
gcc-3.4/4.0 dumb question
I didn't understand what I'm supposed to do. I've been using gcc-3.4/4.0 sid for a long time on my laptop. What should I do now ? should I wait until the new gcc-4.0 tree is built? or should I use the standard "pure64" tree? what compiler is pure64 compiled with? 3.3 or 3.4? thanks in advance c. -- . -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
