Re: Re[2]: Two 'gcc's? Yea or Nay?
Hi, > > $ ls -l /usr/bin/egcc /usr/bin/gcc > > -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root60320 Jun 17 03:04 /usr/bin/egcc* > > -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root49460 Jun 15 00:48 /usr/bin/gcc* > > Ok, I haven't posted a BIG DUMMY question in quite some time; I'm overdue! > > SO: what's the significance of the asterisks next to those two lines above? Heh, good question! :) The asterisk after the filename indicates that it is an executable file. Similarly a directory would have a "/" after it. This type of output is caused by doing a "ls -F." Debian sets up the following aliases: unalias ls alias ls 'ls-F -C' It seems that "ls-F" (no space after ls) is a shell built-in command. As stated above, shells that don't have this built-in command can simply use "ls -F" (with a space after ls) to produce the desired output. Incidentally, here is an excerpt from the ls man page: -F, --classify Append a character to each file name indicating the file type. For regular files that are executable, append a `*'. The file type indicators are `/' for directories, `@' for symbolic links, `|' for FIFOs, `=' for sockets, and nothing for regular files. -Ossama -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re[2]: Two 'gcc's? Yea or Nay?
Anthony Fok <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well, if you are patient (to wait for the CD), or if you don't mind > downloading Debian 2.0 Beta: Debian 2.0 Beta already comes with both gcc > and egcs. ;-) Kewl. BTW, Linux System Labs is taking orders for 2.0 (at least they've got mine!); they forecast delivery starting the end of this month or early next... > $ ls -l /usr/bin/egcc /usr/bin/gcc > -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root60320 Jun 17 03:04 /usr/bin/egcc* > -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root49460 Jun 15 00:48 /usr/bin/gcc* Ok, I haven't posted a BIG DUMMY question in quite some time; I'm overdue! SO: what's the significance of the asterisks next to those two lines above? n--e--u--t--r--i--n--of--e--v--e--r--!- Bob Bernstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.brainiac.com/bernie at Esmond, R.I. ftp://rupturedduck.dyn.ml.org (sometimes) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re[2]: Two 'gcc's? Yea or Nay?
Christopher Fury <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Don't worry, I had a simular but unlrelated FAQ reading problem with > egcs recently too... :) Hmmm...sort of a new public mental health issue, huh? We could call it FAQophobia or something equally pithy! Start a movement to defend the rights of FAQ-literacy-challenged minority group, and nominate ourselves its founding members. > configure egcs like so: > > ../configure --prefix=/usr/local/egcs > > when you install, this will make a directory egcs in /usr/local. > > then I went into /usr/local/bin and symlinked the binaries so I could > have both gcc and egcc (what I called the symlink for egcs's version of > gcc). This appears to be an excellent tactic; it's too bad that in typical bull-in-china-shop fashion I just barged into the compile using the default /usr/local prefix! When will I learn patience? Oh well, I'll just do it over as I've done over so many other things! Thanks! n--e--u--t--r--i--n--of--e--v--e--r--!- Bob Bernstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.brainiac.com/bernie at Esmond, R.I. ftp://rupturedduck.dyn.ml.org (sometimes) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Two 'gcc's? Yea or Nay?
On Wed, Jun 24, 1998 at 11:47:27PM -0400, Bob Bernstein wrote: > > I would like to put egcs on this Debian 1.3 system (which, with the imminent > release of 2.0 CD's will most likely become my next "experimental" victim) but > it now occurs to me to ask what caveats I should observe upon accomplishing > that. > > Should I rename /usr/bin/gcc (the GNU gcc) and then put a symlink in that dir > to point to /usr/local/bin/gcc? Perhaps there are other changes I ought to > make? Well, if you are patient (to wait for the CD), or if you don't mind downloading Debian 2.0 Beta: Debian 2.0 Beta already comes with both gcc and egcs. ;-) I'm lazy, so I never compile egcs. ;-) When I want to use egcs instead of gcc, I just use "CC=egcc". :-) $ ls -l /usr/bin/egcc /usr/bin/gcc -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root60320 Jun 17 03:04 /usr/bin/egcc* -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root49460 Jun 15 00:48 /usr/bin/gcc* Cheers, Anthony -- Anthony Fok Tung-LingCivil and Environmental Engineering [EMAIL PROTECTED] University of Alberta, Canada [EMAIL PROTECTED] Keep smiling! *^_^* Come visit Our Lady of Victory Camp -- http://olvc.home.ml.org/ or http://www.ualberta.ca/~foka/OLVC/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Two 'gcc's? Yea or Nay?
Read the FAQ for egcs, it describes how to install and still have gcc. Don't worry, I had a simular but unlrelated FAQ reading problem with egcs recently too... :) Here's what I did (Still read the FAQ to make sure the gist is right) configure egcs like so: ./configure --prefix=/usr/local/egcs when you install, this will make a directory egcs in /usr/local. then I went into /usr/local/bin and symlinked the binaries so I could have both gcc and egcc (what I called the symlink for egcs's version of gcc). cd /usr/local/bin ln -s /usr/local/egcs/bin/gcc egcc ln -s /usr/local/egcs/bin/g++ eg++ ln -s /usr/local/egcs/bin/c++ egc++ ln -s /usr/local/egcs/bin/g77 eg77 That's it, it seems to work for me. Anybody out there see any caveats in my technique? Bob Bernstein wrote: > > As is my wont, I experiment with stuff on an old RH4.2 install (except as > noted recently in this venue, my foray in Gnomeification-From-Source, which I > carried out wily-nily on this Debian 1.3 system). > > I recently built from source, on the olde RH, egcs 1.0.2; said build process > is certainly a sight to behold! egcs installed its binary into /usr/local/bin. > So, depending on which path is active (su or user) I get either GNU gcc or > egcs when I bang 'gcc' into the keyboard. > > I would like to put egcs on this Debian 1.3 system (which, with the imminent > release of 2.0 CD's will most likely become my next "experimental" victim) but > it now occurs to me to ask what caveats I should observe upon accomplishing > that. > > Should I rename /usr/bin/gcc (the GNU gcc) and then put a symlink in that dir > to point to /usr/local/bin/gcc? Perhaps there are other changes I ought to > make? > > It occurs to me that perhaps during some 'make install' - when I have become > su - that I might befuddle something via installing it with GNU gcc after I > have built it with egcs' "gcc". > > Does this make any sense at all? > > Ruminations, reminiscences, reproaches, all gladly examined! TIA. > > n--e--u--t--r--i--n--of--e--v--e--r--!- > Bob Bernstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.brainiac.com/bernie > at > Esmond, R.I. ftp://rupturedduck.dyn.ml.org (sometimes) > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Two 'gcc's? Yea or Nay?
As is my wont, I experiment with stuff on an old RH4.2 install (except as noted recently in this venue, my foray in Gnomeification-From-Source, which I carried out wily-nily on this Debian 1.3 system). I recently built from source, on the olde RH, egcs 1.0.2; said build process is certainly a sight to behold! egcs installed its binary into /usr/local/bin. So, depending on which path is active (su or user) I get either GNU gcc or egcs when I bang 'gcc' into the keyboard. I would like to put egcs on this Debian 1.3 system (which, with the imminent release of 2.0 CD's will most likely become my next "experimental" victim) but it now occurs to me to ask what caveats I should observe upon accomplishing that. Should I rename /usr/bin/gcc (the GNU gcc) and then put a symlink in that dir to point to /usr/local/bin/gcc? Perhaps there are other changes I ought to make? It occurs to me that perhaps during some 'make install' - when I have become su - that I might befuddle something via installing it with GNU gcc after I have built it with egcs' "gcc". Does this make any sense at all? Ruminations, reminiscences, reproaches, all gladly examined! TIA. n--e--u--t--r--i--n--of--e--v--e--r--!- Bob Bernstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.brainiac.com/bernie at Esmond, R.I. ftp://rupturedduck.dyn.ml.org (sometimes) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
