On Fri, 1 Mar 2002, Erich Schubert wrote: > Package: gcc-3.0 > Version: 1:3.0.4-1 > Severity: normal > > Shouldn't gcc-3.0 be an alternative for cc? maybe for gcc too? > > /usr/bin/cc is provided by gcc, but not by gcc-3.0 ?
The short answer is no, gcc is just package built from gcc-defaults that points to the preferred compiler on your architecture (most likely gcc-2.95). There are good reasons why alternatives weren't used for gcc packages, trust us :-) If you wish to switch your system over to use gcc-3.0 by default, you may locally modify and rebuild the gcc-defaults source package so that it sets up the links for you. A word of warning, though, if there are any other users on your system that expect the compiler to behave as 2.95.x has done in the past, swapping this system-wide may not be a good idea. If you're just looking to test gcc 3.0.x with your own code, it's usually preferred to alter your environment variables (ie. CC=gcc-3.0) or makefiles to accomplish this. Side-note to Matthias: Should we do a debconf item for this? I'm getting tired of seeing this question pop up at least once every two weeks for months now...and I'm sure I'm not alone :-) C
