Re: Should this be filed as grave? Gcc-2.95
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003, Steve Lamb wrote:
> Uh, no. I see no reason why gcc-2.95 must depend on a package which does
> nothing more than install a symlink called gcc which, in turn, depends on
> gcc-3.3 forcing 3.3 to be installed. Furthermore it is insane that a person
> could apt-get install gcc-2.95 ; gcc -v and get 3.3!
Have you ever heard of alternatives? If 2 packages are installed, both
providing the same alternative, it's up to you to decide which is used.
I'm not saying that /usr/bin/gcc is managed by alternatives, or should be.
I'm just saying the use case is the same.
If you want gcc-2.95, instead of the default gcc(whatever it is), then call
gcc-2.95 directly.
Reply to: