GCC-4.1.1 Stable
August 30th, 2006Well big news today:
< +CIA-15> tsunam * gentoo-x86/sys-devel/gcc/ (gcc-4.1.1.ebuild
ChangeLog):
< +CIA-15> Everyone run for cover, gcc-4 is now stable on x86. Woot
< +CIA-15> (Portage version: 2.1-r2)
That’s right, gcc-4.1.1 has gone stable on x86 and amd64 just a few minutes ago. The mirrors will take a few hours to get caught up but you’ll soon be upgrading to the wonders of a new gcc. Please remember though when you upgrade to read over the gcc upgrading guide.
Would like to of course thank Mark Loeser(halcy0n) for all the effort he put into making this possible. Releng for helping to push it to go stable. As well all the AT’s who helped test things for stable. I’d also like to thank Ryan Hill(dirtyepic) personally for helping me get stuff filed and marked as a blocker for it going. Everyone enjoy the new stable release.
Please note, upgrading to glibc-2.4 as part of the requirement is non reversable. I repeat you can’t go back to glibc-2.3. If you attempt it your machine is now quite broken and its time to reinstall.
August 30th, 2006 at 7:24 pm
Since I’ve been running the arch vesrion for a long time I wonder how I can now “un-unmask” it so as to make my package.keywords smaller?
August 30th, 2006 at 7:37 pm
Btw, what useflags would be optimal for the glibc update?
[ebuild U ] sys-libs/glibc-2.4-r3 [2.3.6-r4] USE=”-build (-erandom%) (-glibc-compat20%) -glibc-omitfp -hardened (-multilib) nls nptl nptlonly -profile (-selinux)” 15,756 kB
The upgrade guide says nothing about it.
oh, of course I should say that my current install has been working just fine for a long time. But today the emerge world says I should update my glibc from 2.3 => 2.4. Since you stated above that it isn’t reversable, I’d prefer to Do-It-Right-The-First-Time(tm).
August 30th, 2006 at 8:49 pm
Not a problem kim, your flags are quite fine as they are. As the linux threads is now gone and it’d complain if you didn’t have nptl and nptlonly set. As to the first, when you say un-unmask are you tlaking about masking it again or something else?
August 31st, 2006 at 11:39 am
No, I mean, if the 4.1.1 I’m currently running no longer needs to be in packages.keywords, then I should remove it, I feel.
August 31st, 2006 at 4:02 pm
Ah yes, you can remove it from packages.keywords. Its a good idea to clean that out periodically so that you don’t get hit with bugs etc on down the road.
August 31st, 2006 at 7:55 pm
ok, now for my next trick. How do I check to see if my keyworded packages are still usefull? Not as in ‘do I use the programs?’, but as in ‘does it still have to be ~x86?’. Of course, I have no wish to do this manually, one by one …
August 31st, 2006 at 8:12 pm
I actually don’t know of a application that will do it automatically. Depending on how many are in your keywords( which sounds like a lot) you probably don’t want to remove everything and do a emerge -avu world to see what would be downgraded. Beyond that it’d be manually checking what you want/need vs what’s stable in the tree. Might be good to request some things to go stable if they’ve been bugfree and been in the tree for more then thirty days (the particular version)