On Mon, Apr 07, 2003 at 03:41:44AM +0200, Felix Erkinger wrote: > Is there a difference if i compile a kernel (2.4-20) with gcc 2.95? > (from stable) or with gcc 3.2 (unstable) ? Yes. They're not, as far as I know, safely compatible. You can't really compile one part with 2.95 and one with 3.2 and expect it to work...it should work if you compile the whole thing with one compiler though...if it doesn't, it's either a bug in the kernel or a bug in gcc. > And if yes, how can i simple install gcc3.2 on a stable box, > compile my kernel, without interfering with the rest (gcc295 and others) ? Why? If you have a really good reason, then I'm fairly sure Adrian Bunk has packaged gcc 3.2 for Woody. He posts updates to this list fairly frequently, so eithe find it here, google, or check http://www.apt-get.org/. Just remember to NOT make it the default C++ compiler on your system, or you'll have massive problems (all newly compiled C++ apps will fail). -- Rob Weir <rweir@ertius.org> http://www.ertius.org/ GPG keys: 1024D/1E73B7CD, 4096R/3ABDE5EC | Do I look like I want a CC? Words of the day: benelux quarter warfare Montenegro PGP Vince Foster gamma
Attachment:
pgpmoPu0ge6IU.pgp
Description: PGP signature