Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 22 Jul 2008 10:26:34 -0700
From:      David Southwell <david@vizion2000.net>
To:        "Garrett Cooper" <yanefbsd@gmail.com>
Cc:        Jeremy Chadwick <koitsu@freebsd.org>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: gcc versions following upgrade 6.3 >7.0
Message-ID:  <200807221026.35061.david@vizion2000.net>
In-Reply-To: <7d6fde3d0807220816y7817c29g263afc77786f16b0@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <AB217A93D96E483695869A497569A44A@sleuth64> <20080722081630.GA86993@eos.sc1.parodius.com> <7d6fde3d0807220816y7817c29g263afc77786f16b0@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tuesday 22 July 2008 08:16:38 Garrett Cooper wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 1:16 AM, Jeremy Chadwick <koitsu@freebsd.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 01:07:53AM -0700, David Southwell wrote:
> >
> > The "base system" does not add anything to the ports/pkg database.  The
> > reason you have gcc 4.1.3 and gcc 4.2.5 on your machine is because some
> > other port/package depended/depends on them.  pkg_info -R will solve
> > that mystery.
> >
> > As I said before: some ports/packages may require a newer (or older)
> > version of GCC, in which case, you'll end up with two (or more) versions
> > of gcc on your system -- one in the base and one (or more) managed via
> > ports.
> >
> > Regardless of what Garrett and others say about how multiple compilers
> > on a system "works great", I do not advocate it.  There are many catches
> > which can/will surprise you down the road, especially with regards to
> > library linking order, symbol versioning, and a couple other things.
> > I'm sorry, but in my eyes it's risky behaviour.  We've been down this
> > road before back when perl was in the base system, for similar reasons.
>
> The complication and mess stems from the fact that you'll need to
> compile components using an absolute prefix to the compiler or have a
> script which manages gcc and the binutils as a series of symlinks
> (Gentoo Linux does that).
>
> Not all projects unfortunately have wizened up to the fact that
> keeping something cross-compile safe is the best way to go so things
> may fail unless you have robust compile tools scripts to help manage
> everything.
>
> Cheers,
> -Garrett

Thanks guys this has been very interesting discussion. I have learnt quite a 
bit.

David



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200807221026.35061.david>