🚀 go-pugleaf

In <1994May8.063849.24863@muffin.apana.org.au> cas@muffin.apana.org.au (Craig Sanders) writes:
>I'm wondering if I've finally come up to a version of Linux which
>requires a later version of gcc and the libraries.

Someone else has answered this.

>If this is the case, then could someone give me some tips on what to do
>to upgrade the compiler?

If you did want to upgrade, I can tell you my experiences. I tried first
to install the vanilla gnu gcc 2.5.8, but ran in to lots of problems which
I couldn't fathom. I can't remember what they are now, because I put it
into the too-hard basket, and tried H.J. Lu's releases instead.

With HJL I had no problems apart from those caused by my failing to 
read the release notes and follow instructions to the letter. As far as I can
recall, the only thing I had to figure out was with the libc install, 
where libm.so.x.y was moved from /lib to /usr/lib, but one of the makefiles
still referred to /lib. Apart from that, no trouble.

I installed gcc 2.5.8, then libc 4.5.21. Libc required binutils 1.9, tools 2.10
or above, and ld.so 1.4.3 or above. Once all that was done, I installed
libg++ 2.5.3l.2. Of all these, libg++ included the binaries and recommended
against trying to recompile. All the others had to be built. 

Once I had installed gcc 2.5.8 I then installed and built linux 1.0 (as well
as all the other packages above, obviously) without any problems.

You will need plenty of time and probably about 50Mb free disk space to
build everything. Was it you who said something about "time to build a 
coffee plantation"....you'll have it.

Graham