Pending GCC-3.1 upgrade - do or don't

Khiari Méher kmeher at
Wed May 8 23:28:15 PDT 2002

I am very confused about the number of threds talking about this subject, so
I want to give some points.

First of all, all of you speaks about gcc 3.1 like it were released for
weeks, yes it is an experimental compiler, for one reason : there is no
official release from the developpers about 3.1 version. And thus it can
contain many (and much many) bugs that can only araise in certain cases
(exceptions). We can compare it to the version shipped with RH and Mandrake
(GCC 2.96) it works the most of the time but breaks sometimes (for me with
only an upgrade of glibc, and a friend with a test of Blue Eyed OS).

In second, what I know about an LFS system is a _minimal_ and _personal_
system. There is a book to tell about the behavior of a _minimal_ system,
and you have to make your system with your personal choices (and the GCC you
want). The book's object is to guide a person to use a bunch of packages
with their earlier releases and not to force it to use this or that version
of the package. For example I used the book to downgrade my GCC version from
2.96 to 2.95.3 and upgrade my glibc to 2.2.4 in my RH box (to be able to get
Kylix working).

I didn't have the time to read all the threads (they are so many), so I
don't have the opinion of all the speakers.
But there are two that confuse all the rest : Ian and Gerard.
Ian : Use the version you want and let the others see their own future.
Gerard : I know that you will not inorporate a CVS version of GCC in a
released book, so until the time it will be released the only things to say
are benshmarks about this or that package. And not to be incorporated or not
(we don't have any idea about the final product !).

For all : Go behind this subject and see the real problems :).

I hope you a good day.

Unsubscribe: send email to listar at
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list