Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
GCC 4.1.0 - is it safe/worth ?
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Portage & Programming
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Kidel Fastro
n00b
n00b


Joined: 05 Apr 2006
Posts: 29
Location: Kraków / Poland

PostPosted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 8:53 pm    Post subject: Re: are those necessary CFLAGS? o.O Reply with quote

luser99 wrote:
SHOULD I ENABLE THOSE FLAGS AND RECOMPILE MY SYSTEM?


Well as i said, everything is working without any problems.
Did you mean that all these cflags ale blending performance ? or only when they are used together ?

Code:
-mmmx -msse -msse2 -ffast-math -mfpmath=sse,387 -DNO_DEBUG -DG_DISABLE_ASSERT -DNDEBUG

_________________
He who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
red-wolf76
l33t
l33t


Joined: 13 Apr 2005
Posts: 714
Location: Rhein-Main Area

PostPosted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 4:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

maverick6664 wrote:
I've got another trouble.

Since I upgraded gcc to 4.1.0 and glibc to 2.4-r1 and some other packages, I have been getting crash with mozilla/seamonkey-1.0.1 and nightly build (not gentoo's package), when opening http://www.google.com or browsing http://softwareforums.intel.com/ids. The crash doesn't always happen, but more often than not.

So I want to ask what's the possibility of the cause? :?:

I suspect glibc-2.4 and am trying to go back to 2.3.6-r3 (yes, going back is somewhat tricky, but I found a way). I seem to have to do another "emerge -e world"....!! :)
I think, reverting glibc is a Bad Thing™, but did you try 2.4-r2 yet?
_________________
0mFg, G3nt00 r0X0r$ T3h B1g!1111 ;)

Use sane CFLAGS! If for no other reason, do it for the lulz!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
maverick6664
Guru
Guru


Joined: 13 May 2005
Posts: 409
Location: Tokyo / Japan

PostPosted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 12:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

red-wolf76 wrote:
I think, reverting glibc is a Bad Thing™, but did you try 2.4-r2 yet?

Time will tell.. :)

I had mistakenly deleted part of portage database in /var/lib/pkg, and had to build my box from scratch!! At a time, I couldn't go ahead because of /var/lib/pkg/sys-libs/XXXXXXX-LOCK (or something like that) and when I deleted it, I removed other files also.. :( That's the beginning of this fun! :D

So now I'm building that system again with gcc-4.1.0 glibc-2.3.6-r3 this time. I tried to install glibc-2.4-r2, but it cannot be unmasked with /etc/portage/package.keywords (I can upgrade up to 2.4-r1). How can I install it (but it's not necessary for now)? Now I'm using the 2nd Gentoo box to post this.
_________________
Tetsuji Rai
a.k.a. Lukiest in the world
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
red-wolf76
l33t
l33t


Joined: 13 Apr 2005
Posts: 714
Location: Rhein-Main Area

PostPosted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 3:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

maverick6664 wrote:
red-wolf76 wrote:
I think, reverting glibc is a Bad Thing™, but did you try 2.4-r2 yet?

Time will tell.. :)

(...)

So now I'm building that system again with gcc-4.1.0 glibc-2.3.6-r3 this time. I tried to install glibc-2.4-r2, but it cannot be unmasked with /etc/portage/package.keywords (I can upgrade up to 2.4-r1). How can I install it (but it's not necessary for now)? Now I'm using the 2nd Gentoo box to post this.
Forget what I said. My brain is cheese. I just checked and I've got -r1 installed as well. I posted that from my windows-box at work, so obviously I momentarily plunged into mental oblivion.

Now if only I could get my boss to install Gentoo on all machines. That would so totally alter my job profile! :lol:
_________________
0mFg, G3nt00 r0X0r$ T3h B1g!1111 ;)

Use sane CFLAGS! If for no other reason, do it for the lulz!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
krigav
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 10 Nov 2005
Posts: 121

PostPosted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 3:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Running GCC 4.1 with Glibc 2.3.6 and KDE 3.5.2 without any issues. So far everything emerged just fine. :D

So far I can't see any noticeable speed up. too.
_________________
There are no dumb questions, just dumb answers. So please help users that are new to linux/gentoo by answering unanswered questions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
maverick6664
Guru
Guru


Joined: 13 May 2005
Posts: 409
Location: Tokyo / Japan

PostPosted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 5:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Now I have no crash with mozilla/seamonkey to open gmail or google. I'm not sure it was due to glibc-2.4 or not (other libraries might by corrupted), but now I'm completely satisfied with my current environments.

I want to stick to older (I mean "close to the stable release") packages, so I will use glibc-2.3.6-r3 for the time being.

Thanks all!!
_________________
Tetsuji Rai
a.k.a. Lukiest in the world
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
John R. Graham
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 08 Mar 2005
Posts: 7840
Location: Somewhere over Atlanta, Georgia

PostPosted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 6:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
* Compiling will be slower compared to almost any other version of GCC. ...

Yep. About 40% slower for me, as measured on GLIBC 2.4, which should be a sufficiently long and varied compile to be some sort of benchmark.

- John
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
luser99
n00b
n00b


Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 27

PostPosted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 9:28 pm    Post subject: Re: are those necessary CFLAGS? o.O Reply with quote

Kidel Fastro wrote:
luser99 wrote:
SHOULD I ENABLE THOSE FLAGS AND RECOMPILE MY SYSTEM?


Well as i said, everything is working without any problems.
Did you mean that all these cflags ale blending performance ? or only when they are used together ?

Code:
-mmmx -msse -msse2 -ffast-math -mfpmath=sse,387 -DNO_DEBUG -DG_DISABLE_ASSERT -DNDEBUG


Ok I will then emerge my entire system with those CFLAGS. Those CFLAGS aren't blending my performance at all. At irc #gentoo I was told no to use them but apparently by merely putting those sse, mmx USE flags don't make any impact, because I see mplayer using like 50% 60% of cpu. I am also confirming this issue with those forums blender and how they tested glibc and blender with and without those CFLAGS. But next time I recompile the entire system I'll set distcc because it takes insanely long with a crappy p3 1133MHz :-(

thanks
_________________
I am a luser :'-(
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
luser99
n00b
n00b


Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 27

PostPosted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 9:29 pm    Post subject: go back to 3.4.x Reply with quote

krigav wrote:
Running GCC 4.1 with Glibc 2.3.6 and KDE 3.5.2 without any issues. So far everything emerged just fine. :D

So far I can't see any noticeable speed up. too.


Perhaps if you emerge everything back to gcc 3.4.x right now you'll notice the difference. Let's us know about it!!
_________________
I am a luser :'-(
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
krigav
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 10 Nov 2005
Posts: 121

PostPosted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 8:11 pm    Post subject: Re: go back to 3.4.x Reply with quote

luser99 wrote:
krigav wrote:
Running GCC 4.1 with Glibc 2.3.6 and KDE 3.5.2 without any issues. So far everything emerged just fine. :D

So far I can't see any noticeable speed up. too.


Perhaps if you emerge everything back to gcc 3.4.x right now you'll notice the difference. Let's us know about it!!


My previous gentoo installation was compiled with GCC 3.4.5, and wasn't remarkable faster than my current system (of course this is just my subjective feeling, I haven't made any measurements!), beside the fact that the compilation times with GCC 3.4 seemed to be shorter. But these aren't very important for me.
_________________
There are no dumb questions, just dumb answers. So please help users that are new to linux/gentoo by answering unanswered questions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
maverick6664
Guru
Guru


Joined: 13 May 2005
Posts: 409
Location: Tokyo / Japan

PostPosted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 9:30 pm    Post subject: Re: go back to 3.4.x Reply with quote

krigav wrote:

My previous gentoo installation was compiled with GCC 3.4.5, and wasn't remarkable faster than my current system (of course this is just my subjective feeling, I haven't made any measurements!), beside the fact that the compilation times with GCC 3.4 seemed to be shorter. But these aren't very important for me.


I second it... and I tried to use -ftree-vectorize with mozilla/seamonkey (not a Gentoo package), but then seamonkey aborts with segfault. So I removed it and using the default optimization, seamonkey worked perfectly. So vectorization is still buggy with gcc-4.1.0.

I was seriously considering going back to gcc-3.4.x, but it takes time.... I will get along with gcc-4.1.0! When I want to make a program faster, I usually use Intel compiler, which makes much faster binaries than gcc-4.1.0. Now I use it for seti@home, xine, xmms, scilab, etc..... especially seti@home built with icc is twice as fast as gcc-3.4.x.

And that icc is free for Linux. Now I got icc/ifort beta licenses and am trying them. They are really nice.
_________________
Tetsuji Rai
a.k.a. Lukiest in the world
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
luser99
n00b
n00b


Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 27

PostPosted: Thu Apr 27, 2006 12:04 am    Post subject: Re: go back to 3.4.x Reply with quote

maverick6664 wrote:
krigav wrote:

My previous gentoo installation was compiled with GCC 3.4.5, and wasn't remarkable faster than my current system (of course this is just my subjective feeling, I haven't made any measurements!), beside the fact that the compilation times with GCC 3.4 seemed to be shorter. But these aren't very important for me.


I second it... and I tried to use -ftree-vectorize with mozilla/seamonkey (not a Gentoo package), but then seamonkey aborts with segfault. So I removed it and using the default optimization, seamonkey worked perfectly. So vectorization is still buggy with gcc-4.1.0.

I was seriously considering going back to gcc-3.4.x, but it takes time.... I will get along with gcc-4.1.0! When I want to make a program faster, I usually use Intel compiler, which makes much faster binaries than gcc-4.1.0. Now I use it for seti@home, xine, xmms, scilab, etc..... especially seti@home built with icc is twice as fast as gcc-3.4.x.

And that icc is free for Linux. Now I got icc/ifort beta licenses and am trying them. They are really nice.


That's sound more like a selfish act without any sort of contribution to open source community and projects. If I were you I would stick to gcc and drop intel.
_________________
I am a luser :'-(
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
FastTurtle
Guru
Guru


Joined: 03 Sep 2002
Posts: 409
Location: Shake & Bake

PostPosted: Thu Apr 27, 2006 1:57 am    Post subject: Appears to build faster on older hardware Reply with quote

I'm in the middle of a Jackass 1/3 install using gcc-4.1 and kde-3.5.2 and the one thing I've noticed so far is it actually appears to be building slightly faster then many others have reported.

The one fact that I think is making the difference is the elimination of all new options
my current make.conf
Code:
 CFLAGS="-Os -march=i686 -pipe -fomit-frame-pointer"
CHOST="i686-pc-linux-gnu"
CXXFLAGS="${CFLAGS}"
USE="3dnow acpi arts cups dbus -gnome hal kde kdeenablefinal mmx nptlonly qt sse symlink usb"
RSYNC_TIMEOUT=30
MAKEOPTS="-j2"
AUTOCLEAN="yes"
FEATURES="-strict sandbox userpriv usersandbox"

If you notice, I've stuck with the generic i686 CPU and added in the various flags available for my Athlon-xp 1800 in the use flags. I've also stuck with my personal default of -Os as it has always seemed to build slightly smaller code.

My only benchmark is the double -e system rebuild needed for gcc-4.1 as that only took 12 hours total. According to my logs, such a rebuild of the toolchain using 3.4.3 would take 8 hours per pass for 16+ hours all together. So a 4 hour decrease is surely something to crow about. As to how many apps are going to be problematic, I can't say as yet but I'll surely update once I complete the install this weekend.
_________________
AsRock Q87M with E3-1230 Xeon (Haswell)
16GB RAM - Geforce GT640 2GB
Crucial M500 120GB SSD (Windows Boot)
Seagate 250GB Barracuda (linux disk)- Samsung 1TB Spinpoint - WD 2TB Green - Seagate 3TB
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
maverick6664
Guru
Guru


Joined: 13 May 2005
Posts: 409
Location: Tokyo / Japan

PostPosted: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:18 am    Post subject: Re: go back to 3.4.x Reply with quote

luser99 wrote:
That's sound more like a selfish act without any sort of contribution to open source community and projects. If I were you I would stick to gcc and drop intel.


Now that Intel compiler is freely obtainable, I don't care. Even if gcc is open source, I have never hacked it or even seen the source of gcc, while I have ever hacked the source of Linux kernel. When I found a bug of icc or encountered a trouble, I report it to Intel's support and it usually solves it or fixes compiler.

I'm just pursueng the better and see no reason to stick to gcc. I'll use whichever looks better case by case.
_________________
Tetsuji Rai
a.k.a. Lukiest in the world
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
brteag00
n00b
n00b


Joined: 30 Apr 2006
Posts: 1
Location: Madison, WI

PostPosted: Sun Apr 30, 2006 4:07 am    Post subject: GCC/Glibc upgrade experiences Reply with quote

I read through this thread and decided to take the plunge and switch to GCC 4.1 / Glibc 2.4. I run an older system (2xPIII 933, 768 Mb RAM, NVIDIA GeForce 5500). Almost all of my software is "stable" (ie, not testing) with the exception of modular X. Overall, the upgrade was fairly painless, though there was some babysitting involved.

My CFLAGS: -O2 -march=pentium3 -mtune=pentium3 -fomit-frame-pointer -pipe -fweb -ftree-vectorize

My procedure (after unmasking the appropriate packages):
1) emerge gcc (built glibc as a dependency)
2) emerge binutils
3) emerge glibc (now built with gcc 4.1)
4) emerge -e system
5) emerge -e world
6) recompile the gentoo-sources kernel and appropriate add-on modules

Observations:
-- The above took right at 3 days to accomplish, which is about as long as previous GCC upgrades have been.
-- I updated my portage tree to get glibc-2.4-r1, so I didn't get bitten by the trouble that others were seeing.
-- A number of packages did not compile during emerge -e world. All of them were fixed with the ~x86 keyword, though.
-- I encountered three packages that don't like -ftree-vectorize: zlib, pango and pycrypto. The first two caused firefox to crash on startup (though gdb indicated that the crash was in the libraries, not in firefox). The third kept giving me SHA256 hash mismatches when I would try to emerge new packages.

Conclusion: I run an older system, and it is noticeably more responsive after the upgrade. I didn't trash my install, and most of it remained working during the upgrade. I consider this a success.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Halcy0n
Developer
Developer


Joined: 17 Sep 2003
Posts: 1682
Location: Freehold, NJ

PostPosted: Sun Apr 30, 2006 4:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

-ftree-vectorize is still very sensitive. I wouldn't recommend using it on your entire system, and if you do expect any of the fun that comes along with it. I still recommend the simple yet effective "-march=yourarch -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer -pipe" :)
_________________
Mark Loeser
http://www.halcy0n.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
maverick6664
Guru
Guru


Joined: 13 May 2005
Posts: 409
Location: Tokyo / Japan

PostPosted: Sun Apr 30, 2006 5:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Halcy0n wrote:
-ftree-vectorize is still very sensitive. I wouldn't recommend using it on your entire system, and if you do expect any of the fun that comes along with it. I still recommend the simple yet effective "-march=yourarch -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer -pipe" :)

I agree. When I built mozilla nightly build from cvs with -ftree-vectorize, mozilla/seamonkey dumped core. With "-O2 -march=prescott -mfpmath=sse" (I forgot -fomit-frame-pointer!!), it works very nicely.

So in make.conf, I set CFLAGS="-O2 -march=prescott -mfpmath=sse -fomit-frame-pointer -pipe". In packages where accuracy is necessary, some options such as -mfpmath=sse are stripped, so this works for me.

And I found in floating point gcc-4.1.0 with -O option is less accurate than gcc-3.4.5 with -O and icc with -mp/-mp1 option. And that gcc-4.1.0 with -O is slower than icc with -mp1. So I compile scilab (scientific application) with Intel compilers and get much faster speed and better accuracy (but I don't measure accuracy with scilab). In order to derive the best performance, both speed and accuracy, Intel compilers are better than gcc 4.1. But for generic use, gcc-4.1.0 is the best for now.

I use paranoia (available at http://www.netlib.org/paranoia/) to measure floating point accuracy of a compiler.

regards,

-Tetsuji
_________________
Tetsuji Rai
a.k.a. Lukiest in the world
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
radfoj
Guru
Guru


Joined: 31 Dec 2004
Posts: 490
Location: Tísek, Czech Republic

PostPosted: Sun May 07, 2006 4:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

After reading this topic I tried migrate to gcc-4.1.0. Everything went fine (reemerging system + world), so I am wondering, why its still hardmasked. Are there still any pitfalls?

But what is not clear enough for me, what about old gcc-version - is it safe to remove it?

Code:
# gcc-config -l
 [1] i686-pc-linux-gnu-3.4.5
 [2] i686-pc-linux-gnu-3.4.5-hardened
 [3] i686-pc-linux-gnu-3.4.5-hardenednopie
 [4] i686-pc-linux-gnu-3.4.5-hardenednopiessp
 [5] i686-pc-linux-gnu-3.4.5-hardenednossp
 [6] i686-pc-linux-gnu-4.1.0 *
Code:
$ eix libstdc++
* sys-libs/libstdc++-v3
     Available versions:  ~3.3.3-r1 3.3.4 ~3.3.6
     Installed:           3.3.6
     Homepage:            http://gcc.gnu.org/libstdc++/
     Description:         Compatibility package for running binaries linked against a pre gcc 3.4 libstdc++

* virtual/libstdc++
     Available versions:  3.3
     Installed:           3.3
     Homepage:            http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/base/
     Description:         Virtual for the GNU Standard C++ Library

Dont want to break something and dont want to have anything unneeded. Thanks :D
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sirdilznik
l33t
l33t


Joined: 28 Apr 2005
Posts: 731

PostPosted: Sun May 07, 2006 6:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

radfoj wrote:
After reading this topic I tried migrate to gcc-4.1.0. Everything went fine (reemerging system + world), so I am wondering, why its still hardmasked.

Halcy0n wrote:
HyperQuantum wrote:

I'm eager to switch to gcc 4.1, but I want to wait until it is unmasked and enters the testing branch. Anyone here who knows when that will happen? I am a bit reluctant about using masked packages.



I plan on doing it pretty soon. I want to get a few more apps ported (there aren't many left), before I do it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
maverick6664
Guru
Guru


Joined: 13 May 2005
Posts: 409
Location: Tokyo / Japan

PostPosted: Sun May 07, 2006 6:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

radfoj wrote:
After reading this topic I tried migrate to gcc-4.1.0. Everything went fine (reemerging system + world), so I am wondering, why its still hardmasked. Are there still any pitfalls?

maybe because blender has a problem as luser says? :)
_________________
Tetsuji Rai
a.k.a. Lukiest in the world
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AxisDigital
n00b
n00b


Joined: 08 Jun 2005
Posts: 32
Location: Atlanta, GA

PostPosted: Sat May 13, 2006 11:28 pm    Post subject: My experiences with GCC 4.1.0 Reply with quote

So, I un-hard-masked and keyworded GCC 4.1.0 and I'm trying to use it to upgrade my computer from GCC 3.4.5
The system primarily runs XFCE 4 with an assorted mishmash of others, and has (according to the emerge logs) 475 packages on it to upgrade.

Pentium II 333 Mhz
256 MB RAM

*GCC 4.1 and emerge system compile perfectly
*I fell prey to the bug in Portage-2.0.54-r1 that makes emerge -e resume from the beginning, TWICE... (not GCC's fault, just really, really annoying) I see it's stable now; once the updates complete I'll remove it from my package mask.

The following packages will not compile:
gtkhtml-1.1.10-r1 - not solved, but gtkhtml-3.8.2 works. I assume this is for gtk+ 1 apps?
gtk-perl-0.7009-r2 - failed the first time I tried, worked later
lyx-1.3.5-r2 - unresolved as yet. The changelogs (Gentoo's or theirs) say nothing about GCC 4.1 compliance... hmm.
x11-wm/fluxbox-0.9.14-r1 - solved by upgrading to the ~x86 version 0.9.15.1
dev-libs/nss-3.9.2-r2 - solved by upgrading to the ~x86 version 3.11-r1
dev-lang/swig-1.3.21 - solved by upgrading to the ~x86 version 1.3.25
x11-misc/xfractint-20.4.00 - solved by upgrading to the ~x86 version 20.4.03
media-libs/glide-v3-3.10-r4 - unsolved; I realized the computer's video card was a Cirrus Logic, not a Voodoo so I removed glide.

This is just a list of programs that won't compile. I don't know how many work yet (I'm assuming all, right?)

games-strategy/wesnoth-1.0.2 - failed because I compiled sdl without sound support (the computer has no soundcard, but I figured I could still have the game.

And for reference, my system specs:
Code:
Portage 2.0.54-r2 (default-linux/x86/2005.0, gcc-4.1.0, glibc-2.3.6-r3, 2.6.15-gentoo-r1 i686)
=================================================================
System uname: 2.6.15-gentoo-r1 i686 Pentium II (Deschutes)
Gentoo Base System version 1.6.14
dev-lang/python:     2.4.3-r1
dev-util/ccache:     [Not Present]
dev-util/confcache:  [Not Present]
sys-apps/sandbox:    1.2.12
sys-devel/autoconf:  2.13, 2.59-r7
sys-devel/automake:  1.4_p6, 1.5, 1.6.3, 1.7.9-r1, 1.8.5-r3, 1.9.6-r1
sys-devel/binutils:  2.16.1
sys-devel/libtool:   1.4.3-r4, 1.5.22
virtual/os-headers:  2.6.11-r2
ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="x86"
AUTOCLEAN="yes"
CBUILD="i686-pc-linux-gnu"
CFLAGS="-march=pentium2 -O2 -pipe -fomit-frame-pointer"
CHOST="i686-pc-linux-gnu"
CONFIG_PROTECT="/etc /usr/kde/2/share/config /usr/kde/3.4/env /usr/kde/3.4/share/config /usr/kde/3.4/shutdown /usr/kde/3/share/config /usr/lib/X11/xkb /usr/lib/mozilla/defaults/pref /usr/share/config /usr/share/texmf/dvipdfm/config/ /usr/share/texmf/dvips/config/ /usr/share/texmf/tex/generic/config/ /usr/share/texmf/tex/platex/config/ /usr/share/texmf/xdvi/ /var/qmail/control"
CONFIG_PROTECT_MASK="/etc/eselect/compiler /etc/gconf /etc/terminfo /etc/env.d"
CXXFLAGS="-march=pentium2 -O2 -pipe -fomit-frame-pointer"
DISTDIR="/usr/portage/distfiles"
FEATURES="autoconfig distlocks sandbox sfperms strict"
GENTOO_MIRRORS="http://distfiles.gentoo.org http://distro.ibiblio.org/pub/linux/distributions/gentoo"
LANG="en_US.UTF-8"
PKGDIR="/usr/portage/packages"
PORTAGE_TMPDIR="/var/tmp"
PORTDIR="/usr/portage"
SYNC="rsync://rsync.gentoo.org/gentoo-portage"
USE="X aalib apm avi berkdb bitmap-fonts bonobo bzip2 cli crypt cups curl doc dri eds emacs emboss encode exif expat fam foomaticdb fortran gd gif glut gmp gpm gtk gtk2 gtkhtml hal idn imagemagick imlib ipv6 isdnlog java jpeg lcms ldap libg++ libwww mmx mng motif mozilla mpeg mysql ncurses nls nptl opengl pam pcre pdflib perl plotutils png pnp pppd python qt quicktime readline recode reflection samba sasl sdl session slang slp socks5 spell spl ssl svga tcltk tcpd tetex tiff truetype truetype-fonts type1-fonts udev usb wmf x86 xml xml2 xorg xv xvid zlib userland_GNU kernel_linux elibc_glibc"
Unset:  ASFLAGS, CTARGET, INSTALL_MASK, LC_ALL, LDFLAGS, LINGUAS, MAKEOPTS, PORTDIR_OVERLAY


I was also considering switching it to X.org 7, KDE 3.5.2 components and Firefox 1.5, but I think I'll be lucky if the switch to GCC 4 works.

As a general aside, I wrote the output of emerge -epv world to a file so I could check where I am in the (lengthy) process by just finding out what it was doing now (ps -ef). The order of packages has changed since I started the process last week, and I don't really know why.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
WizMaster
n00b
n00b


Joined: 08 Apr 2006
Posts: 19

PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2006 8:09 am    Post subject: Re: My experiences with GCC 4.1.0 Reply with quote

AxisDigital wrote:

I was also considering switching it to X.org 7, KDE 3.5.2 components and Firefox 1.5, but I think I'll be lucky if the switch to GCC 4 works.


Just finishing up my rebuild. Hope Openoffice doesn't crap out. Modular X seemed to compile fine with GCC 4.1. Haven't tried Firefox 1.5.x or KDE 3.5.x yet but I doubt it will cause problems.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
radfoj
Guru
Guru


Joined: 31 Dec 2004
Posts: 490
Location: Tísek, Czech Republic

PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2006 8:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

radfoj wrote:
But what is not clear enough for me, what about old gcc-version - is it safe to remove it?

When nobody warned me, I removed old gcc version and no problems at all:
Code:
# gcc-config -l
 [1] i686-pc-linux-gnu-4.1.0 *

Yeasterday I upgraded to 4.1.0-r1 also without problem. Thanks, good work, guys :D
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Matteo Azzali
Retired Dev
Retired Dev


Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 1133

PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2006 9:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I didn't posted here the link to gentoo bugzilla? Sorry, HERE you can see which
packages actually have an opened bugreport (some of these have a patch to test) out of the 100'000+ in portage (the marked ones are closed)
_________________
Every day a new distro comes to birth. Every day a distro "eats" another.
If you're born distro, no matter what, start to run.
---- http://www.linuxprinting.org/ ---- http://tuxmobil.org/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AxisDigital
n00b
n00b


Joined: 08 Jun 2005
Posts: 32
Location: Atlanta, GA

PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2006 5:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, my system finished compiling with no other problems. I'm now updating a few packages to their latest versions (in particular, gentoo-sources and gcc-4.1). Having restarted X, I can confirm that X.org 6.8.2-r7, XFCE 4.2.3 and Firefox 1.0.8 all work fine when compiled with GCC 4.1
I still have yet to find which program on my system requires gtkhtml-1.1.10; none of them seem to and the equery seems to have stalled (23 hours running without finding anything, and I just killed it). I'll let you know if lyx works out, and I guess I'll file a bug if it doesn't.

I've decided against Firefox 1.5 because it sounds like it wouldn't be stable even if it DID manage to compile properly.
I may still try X.org 7; that'd be a more important transition to make than just Firefox.

Overall, I'd say GCC 4.1 is relatively safe (provided you don't mind keywording a couple packages, and don't have any of the rare packages that don't work yet). I don't know yet if it's worth while.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Portage & Programming All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 3 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum