On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 12:16:43 -0400
"H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh@quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:
> Downgrading sounds like overkill in this situation. I only had to edit
> /usr/src/linux/Makefile to change HOSTCC to gcc-2.95 and export
> CC=gcc-2.95 in the environment, and it worked fine for me. This is on
> 2.4.21, of course, but I suspect the same holds for 2.4.20.
[ SNIP ]
> ln -s /usr/bin/gcc-2.95 /usr/bin/gcc
> <build kernel>
> ln -s /usr/bin/gcc-3.3 /usr/bin/gcc
Both of which I'd have to remember to do again later on if I compiled the
kernel again. No, when 2.95 didn't work for whatever reason when I told make
to use it I preferred to reduce the variables on the system. If 3.3 isn't
present it can't be invoked, period. I don't have to remember to edit
Makefiles later on on a different revision. I don't have to remember to reset
symlinks, change alternatives or equivs or anything. I'm miffed mainly
because I asked for 2.95 installed and got 3.3 as part of the deal. I don't
take kindly to software installing other software without a clear need and
there simply was no clear need.
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
| -- Lenny Nero - Strange Days
-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
Attachment:
pgpsA7BUUqw6l.pgp
Description: PGP signature