[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Pan-users] Re: Re: Re: Re: 0.92 amd64
From: |
Thomas Stein |
Subject: |
Re: [Pan-users] Re: Re: Re: Re: 0.92 amd64 |
Date: |
Tue, 18 Apr 2006 13:55:52 +0200 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.9.1 |
On Tuesday 18 April 2006 13:09, Duncan wrote:
> There's a gcc-3.4.6-r1 out with a few bugfixes. Maybe that is one of
> them? Something tells me this is likely a bug with 3.4.6, as yeah, 4.1
> might be more efficient, but 1.3 gig compared to 0.3 gig? That looks like
> a bug to me.
Just installed 3.4.6-r1. Same error.
> Note that gcc is slotted. You can therefore unmask 4.1.0 and merge it, if
> desired, and use gcc-config/eselect to switch between versions. I /know/
> 4.1.0 compiles it just fine -- and in less than a third of a gig of
> memory, too!
Okay, i think i will install gcc 4.1. Thanks so far Duncan.
t.
- Re: [Pan-users] Re: Re: 0.92 amd64, (continued)
- Re: [Pan-users] Re: Re: 0.92 amd64, Thomas Fricke, 2006/04/13
- Re: [Pan-users] Re: Re: 0.92 amd64, Thomas Stein, 2006/04/13
- [Pan-users] Re: Re: Re: 0.92 amd64, Duncan, 2006/04/14
- [Pan-users] Re: Re: Re: 0.92 amd64, Duncan, 2006/04/14
- Re: [Pan-users] Re: Re: Re: 0.92 amd64, Thomas Stein, 2006/04/18
- [Pan-users] Re: Re: Re: Re: 0.92 amd64, Duncan, 2006/04/18
- Re: [Pan-users] Re: Re: Re: Re: 0.92 amd64,
Thomas Stein <=
- Re: [Pan-users] Re: Re: Re: Re: 0.92 amd64, Thomas Stein, 2006/04/24
- [Pan-users] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 0.92 amd64, Duncan, 2006/04/24
- Re: [Pan-users] Re: Re: Re: Re: 0.92 amd64, Per Hedeland, 2006/04/24