Re: GCC problem, take two

On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 01:32:07PM +0100, ralf ertzinger wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 12:26:15PM +0100, T. Ribbrock wrote:
> 
> > Hm - that leads me to a question: If the sparc64 (or whatever the
> > "default" gcc is called) gcc is broken on both sparc64 and sparc32
> 
> It is broken on sparc64. sparc32 should be fine.

Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to be...


> > Also, having to use the "sparc32" wrapper on a 32bit box seems off to
> > me - it should be the implicit default IMO.
> 
> It is. As far as I read, you were talking about a sparc64 machine,
> no?

Nope. First time round a few days back I did. This time (which is the
reason I brought this up again), I'm talking about a SparcStation 20
SMP, i.e. sun4m 32 bit. I was wondering about your answer - seemingly,
it was a misunderstanding.


> > as the current description does not make it clear that it's a
> > *required* package on both sparc32 and sparc64.
> 
> It should not be required on sparc32.

Hm... I might install it anyway to see whether that changes anything.

At the moment, this is what gcc I have:

gcc-2.96-113
gcc-c++-2.96-113
gcc-g77-2.96-113
gcc-objc-2.96-113

which is what was installed after the upgrade to 1.0.

Cheerio,

Thomas
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Thomas Ribbrock    http://www.ribbrock.org 
  "You have to live on the edge of reality - to make your dreams come true!"