[CLUE-Tech] GCC versions

[Randy Arabie]

On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Matt Gushee wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 09:16:03PM -0600, Tom Poindexter wrote:
> > > 
> > > My $.02, don't worry about 3.0 until stable realeases begin to appear.
> > 
> > I'd disagree, GCC 3.1.1 has just been released, produces faster code (6-8%,
> > with the right -m, -f & -O options).  The only caveat with Linux is I don't
> > know if the kernel likes GCC 3.x yet.  There was some kernel code that
> > relied on certain code generation from the 2.9x series.  
> > 
> > I believe I saw that RedHat's next release will be fully based on
> > GCC 3.1.
> 
> Well, that's a good reason to avoid it in my book ;-)
> 
> Sarcasm aside, one of the reasons I don't use Red Hat any more is that
> I've had a few too many nasty surprises with their distributions. They
> seem just a little too eager to distribute the latest version of
> everything.
> 
> > There's certainly no reason that you can't have both.
> 
> Yes there is: disk space. This is on a laptop.
 
I'm running Gentoo, and decided I wanted to give OpenOffice a try.  I 
installed via Gentoo's portage system.  The ebuild scripts for OpenOffice 
required GCC v3.0.4.

I have not had time to play with OpenOffice yet, so can't say if it works or 
not.

I did keep GCC v2.95.3...This aint no stinkin' laptop ;-) 

-- 
Cheerio!
        
Randy
http://www.arabie.org/