Arch Linux

user

Member

Registered: 2006-03-29

Posts: 465

[RQ]gcc-4.1.0

I wonder why it didn't listed here. ??

PS: glibc-2.4 need some tricky works, so i wouldn't RQ here, but it is not difficult at all. and generally, more higher version won't break the compatibility.

I can prove my words in 2~3 hours with some tools.

---

I removed my sig, cause i select the flag, the flag often the target of enemy.

SAR brain-tumor
[img]http://img91.imageshack.us/img91/460/cellphonethumb0ff.jpg[/img]

jaboua

Member

Registered: 2005-11-05

Posts: 634

Re: [RQ]gcc-4.1.0

It's not listed here since GCC and GLIBC is used through the whole system and maintained by devs, not by AUR. Glibc and gcc requires all the binary packages to be rebuilt to take effect, so I heard the devs want to wait until after the next release (0.7.2?) is made.

user

Member

Registered: 2006-03-29

Posts: 465

Re: [RQ]gcc-4.1.0

Glibc and gcc requires all the binary packages to be rebuilt to take effect,

Excuse me, what are those binary packages?

In my opnion, just compile and installation doesn't hurt anything.

---

I removed my sig, cause i select the flag, the flag often the target of enemy.

SAR brain-tumor
[img]http://img91.imageshack.us/img91/460/cellphonethumb0ff.jpg[/img]

iphitus

Forum Fellow

From: Melbourne, Australia

Registered: 2004-10-09

Posts: 4,927

Re: [RQ]gcc-4.1.0

Glibc and gcc requires all the binary packages to be rebuilt to take effect,
Excuse me, what are those binary packages?

nearly every single package in the repositories.

In my opnion, just compile and installation doesn't hurt anything.

it just take a helluva lot of the developer's time.

Offline

Gullible Jones

Member

Registered: 2004-12-29

Posts: 4,863

Re: [RQ]gcc-4.1.0

Just to elaborate, compiling applications takes quite a long time, and some apps (e.g. Firefox) can be quite finicky. Also, when compiling with a new release of GCC, you're bound to run into problems with old code and stuff...

user

Member

Registered: 2006-03-29

Posts: 465

Re: [RQ]gcc-4.1.0

Yes i know the case,
gcc 3.3.4 works fine with linux kernel 2.4.x, whereas, gcc 3.4.4 doesnt work with it.

But, here what i meant was that between gcc4.0.3 and 4.1.0.
nearly sure it works fine with things that fine with 4.0.3.

---

I removed my sig, cause i select the flag, the flag often the target of enemy.

SAR brain-tumor
[img]http://img91.imageshack.us/img91/460/cellphonethumb0ff.jpg[/img]

tomk

Forum Fellow

From: Ireland

Registered: 2004-07-21

Posts: 9,839

Re: [RQ]gcc-4.1.0

OK, so are you going to recompile all your apps with 4.1.0? If you're "nearly sure", then everything should be fine, shouldn't it?

Let us know how you get on.

user

Member

Registered: 2006-03-29

Posts: 465

Re: [RQ]gcc-4.1.0

OK, so are you going to recompile all your apps with 4.1.0?

No. But if i have to install something, then i will.

And, I will just install gcc-4.1.0 manually, after "sudo pacman -Rd gcc".
Before rebooting, i will compile and install latest linux kernel(no initrd, definitely) and nvidia installer with gcc-4.1.0.

any other apps doesn't  need to be recompiling, simply i will use maden binary.

PS:

And, I will just install gcc-4.1.0 manually, after "sudo pacman -Rd gcc".

Then pacman ask me to install gcc-4.0.3, right?
why isn't there such a option like "sudo pacman -R<anti-k> gcc"??

---

I removed my sig, cause i select the flag, the flag often the target of enemy.

SAR brain-tumor
[img]http://img91.imageshack.us/img91/460/cellphonethumb0ff.jpg[/img]

z4ziggy

Member

From: Israel

Registered: 2004-03-29

Posts: 573

Website

Re: [RQ]gcc-4.1.0

I understand gcc 4.1.0 is still on hold, but is there someone willing to package it so we can compile our own stuff using 4.1.0? 4.0.3 is just too buggy.

---

Archie :: Arch live on steroids

user

Member

Registered: 2006-03-29

Posts: 465

Re: [RQ]gcc-4.1.0

  470  cd download/
  471  ls
  472  svn co svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/tags/gcc_4_1_0_release gcc
  473  ls
  474  mkdir gccbuild
  475  cd gccbuild/
  476  ls
  477  sudo pacman -Ss gmp
  478  sudo pacman -S gmp
  479  sudo pacman -Ss mpfr
  480  sudo pacman -S mpfr
  481  cd ../gcc
  482  ls
  483  sed -i 's/install_to_$(INSTALL_DEST) //' libiberty/Makefile.in && sed -i 's@./fixinc.sh@-c true@' gcc/Makefile.in
  484  cd ../gccbuild/
  485  ls
  486  type gcc
  487  ../gcc/configure     --prefix=/usr     --libexecdir=/usr/lib     --enable-shared     --enable-threads=posix     --enable-__cxa_atexit     --enable-clocale=gnu     --enable-languages=c,c++,treelang
  488  make bootstrap
  489  sudo make install
  490  cd /usr/src/
  491  ls
  492  cd linux-2.6.16.1
  493  make
  494  sudo make
  495  sudo rm -rf /lib/modules/2.6.16.1/
  496  sudo rm -rf /lib/modules/2.6.15-ARCH/
  497  sudo rm -rf /lib/modules/2.6.16-ARCH/
  498  sudo make modules_install
  499  sudo make install
  500  sudo reboot
  501  uname -a
  502  cc -v
  503  history

after the reboot,

sudo ./NVIDIA-Linux-x86-1.0-8756-pkg1.run

startx

cc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: i686-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc/configure --prefix=/usr --libexecdir=/usr/lib --enable-shared --enable-threads=posix --enable-__cxa_atexit --enable-clocale=gnu --enable-languages=c,c++,treelang
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.1.0

PS: it take 30-40 min

---

I removed my sig, cause i select the flag, the flag often the target of enemy.

SAR brain-tumor
[img]http://img91.imageshack.us/img91/460/cellphonethumb0ff.jpg[/img]

Gullible Jones

Member

Registered: 2004-12-29

Posts: 4,863

Re: [RQ]gcc-4.1.0

But that's only installing the new GCC version... To actually see its effects you have to compile everything else with it. Just look at the archives of old Arch newsletters, you'll see what I'm talking about... Granted, they were doing libtool-slay as well during the last big recompile, so it took a bit longer, but it's still a HUGE task.

That said... It would probably be nice to have the SSP and optimizations. Maybe include in time for the 0.7.3 release?

user

Member

Registered: 2006-03-29

Posts: 465

Re: [RQ]gcc-4.1.0

But that's only installing the new GCC version... To actually see its effects you have to compile everything else

Why Arch doesn't support rootstrap(or how to do rootstrap, abs what)?
Except garnome, i have small amount of packages to compile.

---

I removed my sig, cause i select the flag, the flag often the target of enemy.

SAR brain-tumor
[img]http://img91.imageshack.us/img91/460/cellphonethumb0ff.jpg[/img]

Gullible Jones

Member

Registered: 2004-12-29

Posts: 4,863

Re: [RQ]gcc-4.1.0

You mean bootstrapping? You can bootstrap on every distro, as I said it just takes a damn long time. Please understand: compiling stuff takes a lot of processing power, and that means that it takes a lot of time. The Arch devs don't have a handy Beowolf cluster available, so compiling the new toolchain with the old one, then recompiling new copies of the new toolchain with the first copies, then doing that over again for thoroughness, then recompiling everything in the repo that's written in C or C++ with the new toolchain, is going to take a bloody long time!

(And I may not be an expert but you can trust me on this... I've done a Gentoo bootstrap-from-stage-3 install to get GCC 3.4.3 working on it and just compiling the stuff for my stripped-down desktop took a hell of a long time.)

user

Member

Registered: 2006-03-29

Posts: 465

Re: [RQ]gcc-4.1.0

Not bootstrap nor rootstrap, something between that is.
rootfs(base file system which is already done with gcc-4.1.0, and glibc-2.4-i686) overwrite(or upgrade) existen arch linux.

Personally i keep my arch base system as simple, all other software that i need in my home dir(include garnome, binary installer like jdk, eclipse,  etc).

I did it with my old debian, yes it takes a lot of time.
If Arch linux  has RIP(rescue system) by default, these task must be easier.

---

I removed my sig, cause i select the flag, the flag often the target of enemy.

SAR brain-tumor
[img]http://img91.imageshack.us/img91/460/cellphonethumb0ff.jpg[/img]

phrakture

Arch Overlord

From: behind you

Registered: 2003-10-29

Posts: 7,879

Website

Re: [RQ]gcc-4.1.0

makeworld --help

---

http://phraktured.net

JGC

Developer

Registered: 2003-12-03

Posts: 1,664

Re: [RQ]gcc-4.1.0

Yes i know the case,
gcc 3.3.4 works fine with linux kernel 2.4.x, whereas, gcc 3.4.4 doesnt work with it.

But, here what i meant was that between gcc4.0.3 and 4.1.0.
nearly sure it works fine with things that fine with 4.0.3.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. Many apps need patches to get compiled with gcc 4.1. Another tricky thing is that some applications you patch with gcc4.1 patches do compile with gcc 4.1, but don't compile with gcc 4.0, now how does that sound? Though the version number is only a little bit higher, the differences between both compilers are just as big as 3.4 to 4.0.

user

Member

Registered: 2006-03-29

Posts: 465

Re: [RQ]gcc-4.1.0

1. Many apps need patches to get compiled with gcc 4.1.

2. Another tricky thing is that some applications you patch with gcc4.1 patches do compile with gcc 4.1, but don't compile with gcc 4.0

1> Name it. I will test it whether it "sure" or not. (note it sure works fine with gcc-4.0 , first )

2> If applications works fine with gcc-4.1, we don't have to compile it with gcc-4.0.

---

I removed my sig, cause i select the flag, the flag often the target of enemy.

SAR brain-tumor
[img]http://img91.imageshack.us/img91/460/cellphonethumb0ff.jpg[/img]

iphitus

Forum Fellow

From: Melbourne, Australia

Registered: 2004-10-09

Posts: 4,927

Re: [RQ]gcc-4.1.0

1. Many apps need patches to get compiled with gcc 4.1.

2. Another tricky thing is that some applications you patch with gcc4.1 patches do compile with gcc 4.1, but don't compile with gcc 4.0

1> Name it. I will test it whether it "sure" or not. (note it sure works fine with gcc-4.0 , first )

You can tell us. See 'makeworld' which phrakture referred to on the last page.

user

Member

Registered: 2006-03-29

Posts: 465

Re: [RQ]gcc-4.1.0

You can tell us. See 'makeworld' which phrakture referred to on the last page.

Before do it, i will have to run partimage first.

---

I removed my sig, cause i select the flag, the flag often the target of enemy.

SAR brain-tumor
[img]http://img91.imageshack.us/img91/460/cellphonethumb0ff.jpg[/img]

AndyRTR

Developer

From: Magdeburg/Germany

Registered: 2005-10-07

Posts: 1,641

Re: [RQ]gcc-4.1.0

There are still packages in the repos that will not compile with gcc4.0.x. alsa-driver at least needs gcc2.95.

What about those packages that will not compile with latest gcc releases? How long will they stay in the repos? Isn't it time to move them to an unsupported or "old bin" repo?

AndyRTR

iphitus

Forum Fellow

From: Melbourne, Australia

Registered: 2004-10-09

Posts: 4,927

Re: [RQ]gcc-4.1.0

There are still packages in the repos that will not compile with gcc4.0.x. alsa-driver at least needs gcc2.95.

What about those packages that will not compile with latest gcc releases? How long will they stay in the repos? Isn't it time to move them to an unsupported or "old bin" repo?

AndyRTR

alsa-driver is for kernel24 which is being dropped in 8.0.

A majority of the packages in the repositories are maintained in some way, so we'll be able to get them working with patches or simply new releases. Those that are no longer maintained, if they cant be fixed easily, tend to get shown up and have been droppped in the past.

user

Member

Registered: 2006-03-29

Posts: 465

Re: [RQ]gcc-4.1.0

Keep arch small,

IMHO, These packages only need to be maintained,
bash(zsh), binutils, gcc, glibc, ...

Spinning these packages only rapidly.

Developer time and energy is important.

---

I removed my sig, cause i select the flag, the flag often the target of enemy.

SAR brain-tumor
[img]http://img91.imageshack.us/img91/460/cellphonethumb0ff.jpg[/img]

Gullible Jones

Member

Registered: 2004-12-29

Posts: 4,863

Re: [RQ]gcc-4.1.0

What, and ditch the thousands of packages in the repos? You're kidding me... Arch is not Crux you know!

user

Member

Registered: 2006-03-29

Posts: 465

Re: [RQ]gcc-4.1.0

What, and ditch the thousands of packages in the repos? You're kidding me... Arch is not Crux you know!

;-) you make my day.

PS: Don't you see the thousands of packages turn into dust in moment?

---

I removed my sig, cause i select the flag, the flag often the target of enemy.

SAR brain-tumor
[img]http://img91.imageshack.us/img91/460/cellphonethumb0ff.jpg[/img]

iphitus

Forum Fellow

From: Melbourne, Australia

Registered: 2004-10-09

Posts: 4,927

Re: [RQ]gcc-4.1.0

Keep arch small,

IMHO, These packages only need to be maintained,
bash(zsh), binutils, gcc, glibc, ...

Spinning these packages only rapidly.

Developer time and energy is important.

didnt you hear? next version we drop everything and replace init with a staticly compiled emacs. it does the same thing as a whole operating system.