gcc-2.95.3

Marc Heerdink marc_heerdink at softhome.net
Fri Mar 30 10:21:18 PST 2001


jerry wrote on Thu, 29 Mar 2001 19:11:10 -0500:
> I have not followed the lfs book since lfs 2.2 so my results may not
> apply to you but I have upgraded to
> gcc 2.95.3 and glibc 2.2.2 without any problems in the base system.
> 
> I did require patches to xfree86 4.0.3 and ghostscript 6.01 .
> "#include <time.h> " had to be included in a couple of places.
> 
> > > Another question:
> > > I've planned to install glibc-2.2.2 istead of 2.2.1.
> > > Are there any problems?
> > 
> > Use 2.2.1 for now... we'll wait until all common programs compile flawlessly
> on
> > glibc 2.2.2 before it's used in the book.
> > 

I know, I did a couple of NFS systems with this stuff, but I noticed that
nfs-utils and several other quite common programs cause trouble. I can solve
this. You can solve this. Not everyone can. If you consider yourself skilled
enough to try 2.2.2, go ahead. But I warn you that glibc 2.2.2 may not be the
ultimate Linux experience. 2.2.1 is good enough, use that for a no-prob sys.

-- 
There is no programming language, no matter how structured,
that will prevent programmers from writing bad programs.
- L. Flon

Marc Heerdink
marc_heerdink at softhome.net
http://www.koelkast.net/

-- 
Unsubscribe: send email to lfs-discuss-request at linuxfromscratch.org
and put unsubscribe in the subject header of the message




More information about the lfs-dev mailing list