Hi First of all I want to point out that it's me who is screwing my system and I'm solely responsible for that and nobody else. I'm certain that SuSE people are doing their job and they are doing it very well. And I agree (and I think that I wrote it too) that most of my questions were NOT SuSE specific. -----Original Message----- From: Michael Johnson <hekate@intergate.bc.ca> To: suse-linux-e@suse.com <suse-linux-e@suse.com> Date: den 27 augusti 1998 21:59 Subject: Re: [SuSE Linux] Compiler for kernel and C++ Development w.Exceptions!

Try checking out the appropriate lists. Most of your questions aren't really about S.u.S.E. but issues with compilers and glibc.

You seem to know alot about those lists so please point me to lists containings those issues, not those old GCC-HOWTO and GLIBC2-HOWTO docs.

I think PROBABLY most people on here were sane enough to wait for the S.u.S.E. people to upgrade to glibc, and for those of us using more than one compiler, we kept the original gcc on board for the obvious reasons. S.u.S.E. will go glibc in 6.0, can't you be patient till then? Yes I'm insane, i.e. I got this upgrade decease (sickness) that I always need to have the latest version. I blame that on Microsoft.

At last I managed to install the GCC 2.7.2.3 to use for compiling of the kernel. I can also compile some c++ programs (the KDE 1.0 is built in c/c++ 2.7.2.x), whith that version together with libg++ 2.7.2. The compiler and libs got installed under /usr/... so it replace my 2.7.2.1 which came with SuSE.

I mean it is, like, their job, and they know what they are doing. It definately seems to be a better option than screwing up your system and then sending multiple mails to the lists with subtle threats about 'abandoning S.u.S.E.' just because you decided to flame ahead into areas you aren't experienced with (obviously) and managed to possibly damage or cripple some things on your system in the process of making totally unsupported changes.

My intention was NOT to threaten anybody, sorry for any offence taken. I did NOT send multiple mails to this or any list with threats that I would abandon SuSE dist. I only ment that I would probably choose a distribution which contained the compiler versions I was intressted in.

It's kind of assumed that if you're gonna do stuff like this that you are 1) doing it at your own risk or and 2) are in enough command of what you are doing that you can fix your own problems as they come along. <grin> I think you might find SOME help on the kernel and compiler lists. I responded a little bit below:

1) Yes It's on my own risk, but upgrades are not failsafe (nor idiot-safe) so I was kind in a need of discussion forum for that kind of problems, but as you say, everybody but me seems to be so sane that they dont put them self into that kind of problems. 2) I't me who's the root, but sadly enough I haven't been using linux long enough (since May'98!).

On Tue, 25 Aug 1998, Ingvaldur Sigurjonsson wrote:

...

I keep screewing things up on my SuSE 5.2 and now I'm loosing patience.

That's not S.u.S.E.'s fault. Alot of the changes you've made weren't made in the distribution for reasons already mentioned. Glibc is coming at the end of the year. You are taking some real chances with some of this...

In their letter "S.u.S.E. ONline" which I received today, they state that SuSE 5.3 "will be able to execute glibc binaries" but they also state following: "The reliable libc5, responsible for the stability of the entire system, underpins the Linux plattform itself" whatever that means.

...

i) Apparently compiling the kernel 2.0.3x with compiler above 2.7.2.x is not supported.

There are known bugs. If you are going to experiment with compilers be aware of the issues. Egcs, and kernel have lists you might want to check out to find out what those issues are. It's already been stated on this list the issues compiling with the more recent gcc and egcs with 2.0* series kernels. If you intend to precede then you kind of do it at your own risk and you should make sure you know what you're doing. If you want to find out more about what these issues are I recomend you read the appropriate lists...

You mention alot of lists, please tell me which.

...

I read in the GCC FAQ/HOWTO that using the "--prefix=/not/the/same/as/gcc" instead of "-V version" was recommended,

but

...

no other links were mentioned.

Well there's an egcs faq as well. I have a copy. If you like I'll send it and you can scan it to see if it's any use to you or if there's anything you might have missed. There _is_ a step of symlinking involved after 'configure --prefix=BLAHBLAHBLAH' that is included in the installing process so it's really not 100% true to say that all it says is to run configure. That's just plain inaccurate. Maybe you missed it.

...

I have been able to build and successfully boot kernels built with both 2.8.1 and egcs-1.0.3a (gcc version egcs-2.90.29). What does it mean that those builds are not supported? (besides very few answers when asking in newsgroups/mailing lists).

Which lists are you on? Maybe it's the wrong lists. Not supported means there are issues. If you want to details I already told you where you can find them. I also know that just cause something builds and APPEARS o.k. that doesn't always mean all is well.. you know what to do.You should probably be checking out the compiler lists and archives for this not complaining to S.u.S.E.

...

I've installed the glib 2 (libc6) (hey everybody seems to be going with glib 2).

Go through your build process again and reread the instructions to see if there is something you missed? I, and I know others have built sucessfully testlibraries with glibc. I wasn't crazy enough to totally wipe out my libc5 though.

I did NOT wipe out my old libc5, if I had the system wouldn't boot. I followed the instructions in the glibc2-howto.

Advice: if you haven't done something before and are the least bit unsure, TEST TEST TEST. Don't just start deleting and overwriting things if you don't know what you're doing cause you can really screw things up. I think it would make more sense to build a test suite first and check things out, that way you still have your regular system to fall back on. Reread your documentation. The current state is that the libs and compiler shipped with SuSE are under /usr/... and the version I install get installed under /usr/local, I just got some problems which I couldn't figure out and I thought that this was a forum to exchange experience or get advises. I feel that I should be subscribing to other lists than this one, thanks to you.

...

I downloaded and burned 3 CD's with Debian GNU/Linux. The have gcc 2.8.x

and

...

egcs in their release. I have still not decided if I should abandon SuSE but maybe I'll be forced to do so because of their packaging of the C++ compilers i'm intressted in and their debian-package-manager. Still today I prefer SuSE and I'll certainly stay SuSE if I get this working. Yes I bought SuSE 5.2.

These problems are not the fault of S.u.S.E. It just seems you are playing very toxic games with your system, and these changes---like upgrading from libc to glibc without ( apparently ) really knowing what you are doing, can have consequences if you screw it up. Remember you do this stuff at your own risk. This kind of upgrade is not a minor change, so you have to be careful. Threatening to 'abandon S.u.S.E.' if you don't get help isn't the solution to your problem. You would probably have had the same problem regardless of the distribution I think because maybe you weren't really equipped yet ability-wise to make the changes you made and subsequently screwed alot of stuff up.

Again I was NOT threatening anyone, if you feel so it's your problem not mine. I've had the impression that SuSE was the BMW (or Porsche) of the Linux distributions, and I still think so. Maybe I should change to a more development stage linux distribution. Why did you not respond to my questions, like pointing me to other lists etc instead of flaming on my questions them self. That would have been much easier to write than this whole letter. - Ingvaldur

-M

One is most dishonest towards one's God; he is not _permitted_ to sin.

mail: mjohnson@pop3.aebc.com

- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e

- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e