[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Condor-users] compiling Condor
- Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2010 14:37:38 -0500
- From: David Kotz <dkotz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [Condor-users] compiling Condor
The main goal would be to (hopefully) reduce the number of users who are
running vanilla because they're frustrated by weird linking problems. I
don't know if it will really help, but the odds of weird issues cropping
up when our default is gcc 4.2.x and Condor is built with 3.2.x *seem*
like they'd be higher.
On Thu, 2010-08-12 at 15:14 -0400, Ian Chesal wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 3:05 PM, David Kotz <dkotz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >From running strings on our Condor binaries, it seems that
> they were
> compiled with a geriatric version of gcc -- 3.2.3. Is that
> because it
> does not compile correctly with current versions of gcc? I've
> considered a local build, but I'd like to know what
> constraints there
> are first.
> I guess the obvious question is: what do you hope to accomplish by
> compiling with a newer version of gcc? Or are you just trying to do a
> local build with local features?
> It will compile on Linux w/4.1.2 without any issues.
> - Ian
> Cycle Computing, LLC
> The Leader in Open Compute Solutions for Clouds, Servers, and Desktops
> Enterprise Condor Support and Management Tools
> Condor-users mailing list
> To unsubscribe, send a message to condor-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxx with a
> subject: Unsubscribe
> You can also unsubscribe by visiting
> The archives can be found at: