This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Error report (gcc 3.1)
Phil Edwards wrote:
> On Thu, May 16, 2002 at 09:14:59PM +0200, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> > On Thu, 16 May 2002, Stan Shebs wrote:
> > > Yes. We've been hosed by this too, and it's so confusing it should
> > > probably in some sort of FAQ or release note. The problem is that the
> > > old basic_file.h is always going to be in the search path ahead of the
> > > new one, and so any installation that doesn't completely delete the
> > > pre-3.1-final g++-v3 is going to get nailed by this.
> > I believe we'd be better of recommending against installing one version
> > of GCC over another one.
> We do this already on http://gcc.gnu.org/install/ but repetition can't hurt.
> I'll add a note to the libstdc++-v3 FAQ.
The note should mention basic_file.h specifically, since that's
what people are going to see, and the default assumption is going
to be that the package is somehow in error (how often does a bad
install result in a syntax error inside an internal library header?
it's not common).