> > >But a little question, the default gcc seems to be 2.95.3
> > >(/usr/bin/gcc) Also there seems to be version 3.3.4
> > >(/usr/pkg/gcc3/bin/gcc). Suggestions, should I use the 3.3.4 as
> > >default? I think some programs from the pkgsrc used the newer
> > >version...
> >=20
> > depends on your needs. if you want to go into production, i'd stick
> > with 2.95.
> 
> on sparc64, *anything* is better than 2.95, especially true for C++.

that might be/is true unless you get into trouble you don't have with 2.95 -- and that's the point for the production environment. i (personally) don't care whether 3.3.x optimizes the code a little better for 2% better performance of the resulting binary -- stability rulez ;)

> 
> > if you want to play with some new compiler settings and so on, try 3.3
> > (maybe you want to rebuild the whole system w/3.3?).
> 
> you can't rebuild netbsd-1-6 with 3.3, the build system will use its own
> compiler, which is 2.95.
> 

i'm sorry, that was kinda typo: i meant rebuilding (e.g.) pkgsrc stuff, not kernel land.

> > perhaps you want to go testing 2.0BETA?
> 
> that's probably the best thing to do at this time, it should work much
> better on sparc64 than netbsd-1-6.

hm. that might be a metaphysic issue. i just dropped 2.0BETA friday evening in favour of 1.6.2 -- on sparc64 (for a production machine). my favourite toy of course runs 2-0 ;)

regards,

timo
____________________________________________________
Aufnehmen, abschicken, nah sein - So einfach ist 
WEB.DE Video-Mail: http://freemail.web.de/?mc=021200