From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 973 invoked by alias); 3 Jun 2002 13:46:05 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 927 invoked by uid 71); 3 Jun 2002 13:46:02 -0000 Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2002 06:46:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20020603134602.917.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: "David Abrahams" Subject: Re: libstdc++/6913: totally broken? Reply-To: "David Abrahams" X-SW-Source: 2002-06/txt/msg00068.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR libstdc++/6913; it has been noted by GNATS. From: "David Abrahams" To: "Phil Edwards" Cc: , Subject: Re: libstdc++/6913: totally broken? Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2002 09:34:42 -0400 From: "Phil Edwards" > On Mon, Jun 03, 2002 at 08:52:19AM -0400, David Abrahams wrote: > > The FAQ says > > > > "Please read the installation instructions for GCC, specifically the > > part about not installing newer versions on top of older versions" > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > > So I followed the link trying to find that part, but I can't. Having a > > mention in the FAQ but nothing [sufficiently visible] in the installation > > instructions borders on a cruel joke. > > On the top-level installation page, there's a bit recommending that each > GCC get a directory of its own. The way it's phrased, it sounds like the only reason for that is that you might want to un-install it. I won't want to (I have to test against multiple versions of GCC) and anyway I assumed that the -V option doesn't work to select different versions if you follow that recommendation. > On one of the pages linked from that page, > there should be a paragraph pointing it out in more detail, but I don't > recall where offhand. Yes, there should be. However, I scoured those pages for "version", "directory", and "older" and saw nothing relevant. > If you feel that the existing wording doesn't jump out strongly enough, > please do suggest alternates. Some of us have been reading these pages > for so long that we no longer see the words. This is a no-brainer: in BIG, BOLD letters, on the main installation page and on the release pages of the first version which had this problem, and several versions thereafter: CAUTION: installing a new version of GCC over another one with a different major or minor version number can cause both versions to malfunction. You must pass "--prefix=..." as an argument to configure in order to avoid installation conflicts. Actually, the configure script should take care of detecting this mistake and prompting for alternatives. > > correct system? > > Easiest way to to just delete the previous installation before running > "make install" for the new build. And how does one do that? My installation prefix was the default, which appears to have been /usr/local. Is there a description somewhere of all the directories and files added by a GCC installation? How will I know which files to delete? > Or, if you don't mind building it again, rebuild with a different --prefix. I don't mind rebuilding at all, so long as I know how to make things work correctly. Thanks for your help, Dave