On Mon, 04 Oct 2004 11:29:01 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > The lack of a 64 bit compiler able to compile to a 64bit sparc > version 9b instruction set is really, really, really, really pissing > me and hundreds if not thousands of other people off. > > The versions of gcc available in the current stable is lacking this > MUCH NEEDED SUPPORT and since all you have to do is read the > documentation and use the correct host in your configure of gcc I > really see no reason why such idiocy needs to continue.
The testing distribution, and what will become the next stable distribution, has everything you are complaining is missing. The technology simply wasn't ready back when sarge was released. It isn't simply a matter of reading the documentation and rebuilding gcc, you also have to provide all of the libraries side-by-side with their 32-bit counterparts and therefore there are packaging, filesystem layout, and build environment issues as well. You want to make the problem seem much simpler than it really is.
