can't install/compile gcc-3.2

[LaMont Jones]

On Wed, Sep 29, 2004 at 02:31:16AM -0700, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 29, 2004 at 11:25:49AM +0200, Stefan Kluth wrote:
> The only reason that the binaries are missing is the same reason that you
> had trouble building it (bootstrapping).
> It's possible that LaMont knows a quick fix that could get it built in
> universe; I'm CCing him to find out.  If it's a non-trivial matter, though,
> it will need to wait until after the release, since we must concentrate on
> the supported packages.

Not in universe because: gcc-3.2 Build-Depends: gcc-3.2 packages...
Which simply means it hasn't been bootstrapped because no one cared
enough.  I'm doing the i386 builds now: baring issues, we should have
gcc-3.2 (and 2.95, why not...) in the archive within a day or so.
Does anyone want ppc binaries?

> > Do you know how to do this, or have a pointer to the "debian way" of
> > bootstrapping a version of gcc?  I am confident that there is way using
> > apt-get, dpkg and Co. to accomplish this.
> I'm not aware of a documented procedure; bootstrapping is typically a brute
> force sort of problem.  LaMont should know.

I have plans to write a "how to bootstrap an architecture" paper
post-release.  bootstrapping a universe package is a subcase of that,
and made significantly easier by the existance of debian and
snapshot.debian.net, since that lets us go with "(1) start with a working
copy of package Foo. (2) Compile package Foo." :-)

lamont