Opened 19 years ago

Closed 19 years ago

#1500 closed defect (fixed)

GCC-3.3.6

Reported by: flappintoots@… Owned by: Randy McMurchy
Priority: normal Milestone: 6.2.0
Component: BOOK Version: SVN
Severity: normal Keywords:
Cc:

Description

Version increment to 3.3.6

Change History (10)

comment:1 by LFS-User@…, 19 years ago

rep_platform: PCAll

We'll have to revisit the decision that Bruce made earlier this year to not update the GCC-3.3.4 package. There really is no need for it in the book any longer. Both JDK and OpenOffice can compile using the LFS GCC-3.4.x versions. There is no BLFS dependency on GCC-3.3.x any longer.

I suggest we do however update this package, or simply pull it out of the book as obsolete.

comment:2 by flappintoots@…, 19 years ago

That leaves the people that use the closed source ATI driver out in the cold... It depends on libstdc++.so.5

comment:3 by Richard A Downing, 19 years ago

Also hurts me with a Lexmark Z515 printer and it's closed source driver. I suspect that almost all closed source drivers are tested on Red Hat 9, and hence are libstdc++.so.5 linked.

comment:4 by tushar@…, 19 years ago

Since the instructions for 3.4.x and 3.3.x are similar, would like to suggest one more option. Remove 3.3.x and add a note to the 3.4.x section stating that some closed source apps need libstdc++.so.5 from gcc-3.3.x. Also point to the gcc-3.3.x instructions in the 6.1 release.

comment:5 by LFS-User@…, 19 years ago

Tush, we are re-covering ground that was discussed to death just a few months ago, please visit the archives.

Bottom line is that a decision was reached to keep the GCC-3.3.x instructions in the book because

1) they are already there and don't really require much maintenance 2) some folks need the functionality it provides.

I would be more than happy to update BLFS to the current version of GCC-3.3.x, however, during the discussion I referred to earlier, Bruce mentioned to just stay at the current version in BLFS.

If he says to update, I'll gladly update the book.

comment:6 by tushar@…, 19 years ago

Randy, comment #1 talks about revisiting that decision. Hence my suggestion.

comment:7 by LFS-User@…, 19 years ago

What I meant by that comment is to revisit the decision to *not update* the package. I believe the decision was community driven to keep it in the book.

I'm not sure why I even mentioned removing it. I shouldn't have.

comment:8 by LFS-User@…, 19 years ago

Milestone: future6.2
Owner: changed from blfs-book@… to Randy McMurchy

Going ahead and updating BLFS to 3.3.6. The package is still useful. I installed it and now have all the data required to update the book. If we are going to keep it in the book, we may as well go with the most current and bug-free version.

comment:9 by LFS-User@…, 19 years ago

Status: newassigned

comment:10 by LFS-User@…, 19 years ago

Resolution: fixed
Status: assignedclosed

Updated BLFS to GCC-3.3.6

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.