Dan Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I am trying to figure out Linux with the help of O'Reilly's /Running > Linux/. It recommends that I do not install new versions of compilers > unless absolutely necessary just in case things get broken by the new > version of the compiler.
That sounds like FUD to me, unless maybe you're running something like Slackware (or maybe Gentoo) where you're compiling new versions of system programs frequently. On i386, I don't think there have been major problems where a compiler bug crippled unstable, even though the compiler updates fairly frequently. > I really want to install GCC 3.3 with ProPolice > (http://www.research.ibm.com/trl/projects/security/ssp/) enabled by > default. Will this really make compiling programs problematic? In theory, if the patch works, you should be fine. From their description of the patch, if it works as advertised, it shouldn't destroy your ability to compile things, and you can turn it off with a command-line switch. > Can I keep two versions of GCC on my system just in case it breaks > things? How would I go about doing this? If I were doing this, I'd install the modified gcc in a subdirectory of /usr/local (possibly using stow), give the top-level gcc binary a different name (gcc-pp), and then *maybe* install a symlink from /usr/local/bin/gcc to that. Then you'd still have the normal Debian gcc available in case something broke. -- David Maze [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://people.debian.org/~dmaze/ "Theoretical politics is interesting. Politicking should be illegal." -- Abra Mitchell -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
