Linux - NewbieThis Linux forum is for members that are new to Linux.
Just starting out and have a question?
If it is not in the man pages or the how-to's this is the place!
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
GCC buil takes much space...Yes, you need make instal next. Then you can delete the whole source directory, in fact.If you feel you need the source, use 'make clean' after 'make install'. It will delate all compiled files (leaving source).
Hi Mike,
Press CTRL+c to stop the compile. then type "df" to see how much disk
space is left. If you want to finish the compile type "make" again then
"make install".
Michael
Last edited by youngstorm; 07-22-2003 at 05:09 PM.
Distribution: Dual boot XP pro & MDK 10 official, KDE.
Posts: 69
Original Poster
Rep:
Well I used DJGPP c compiler in win xp and I'd like to carry on with a good c compiler. I read that GCC is very good. So if it's there I'll use it.
This way of installing app's is VERY foriegn to me.
Mandrake 9.1 already has 3.2.2 so I was wondering why you wanted to risk breaking your entire install to upgrade to 3.3. I just wondered if you knew a specific reason why you needed to go beyond 3.2.2.
Actually Proud in his similar other post I was suggesting the same thing. There is no need to compile a compiler when one is readily available:
urpmi gcc
As root of course. When prompted for discs, feed em until it's content. Don't mind the roar, it's natural.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.