Re: compiling libstdc++/libg++ 2.8.1.1 with egcs-1.1.1?

[fheitka at ibm dot net]

In <199812292203.OAA24955@kankakee.wrs.com>, on 12/29/98 
   at 02:03 PM, mrs@wrs.com (Mike Stump) said:

>> From: fheitka@ibm.net
>> Date: Tue, 29 Dec 98 06:35:42 -0500

>> In <199812282238.OAA09508@kankakee.wrs.com>, on 12/28/98 
>>    at 02:38 PM, mrs@wrs.com (Mike Stump) said:

>> >> To: egcs@cygnus.com
>> >> Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 20:42:41 -0500 (EST)
>> >> From: "Frederick V. Heitkamp" <heitkamp@ibm.net>

>> >> Can I compile libstdc++/libg++ 2.8.1.1 with egcs-1.1.1?

>> >No, please use the bundled libstdc++, and the current libg++.

>> But what if I have a program that needs them?  
>> Will I need gcc-2.8.1  to compile them?

>But what is the Anti-Christ comes and takes away my computer, what do I
>do then?  Don't worry about it, for now, after it happens, then you can
>worry about it.

Actually, I do have a program that needs them.  That's why I tried  to
compile them.

>If it already happened, then I suggest you learn to fix the
>application to be portable if it isn't or report the bug in the
>compiler(/library).  You might be able to compile other libstdc++
>libraries with egcs, but you'd be exploring someplace that most people
>don't go.

Saddly the application is Netscape, and for Linux there are many versions
that are linked with strange combinations of libraries.  Sometimes you 
have them all and sometimes you don't.

>If you want to be rev locked on 2.8.1, then by all means use it, but if
>you ever need a bug fix or a new compiler, be prepared for egcs.

I was hopping both could live on my computer without fighting.  I was
planning on compiling gcc-2.8.1 with egcs at some point, but I am frying
other fish at the moment.

Fred