Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > A more useful question would be, why does gcc-2.95 depend on gcc? The > answer, as usual, you could have found for yourself in the changelog: > > gcc-2.95 (2.95.3.ds3-5) testing unstable; urgency=low > > * For each binary compiler package xxx-2.95 add a dependency on > xxx (>= 1:2.95.3-2). Fixes #85135, #85141, #85154, #85222, #85539, > #85570, #85578. > * Fix typos. Add note about gcc-2.97 to README (fixes #85180). > > -- Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mon, 12 Feb 2001 01:19:59 +0100 > > You may refer to all of those bugs for reasons why this is so.
I'd love it if someone could explain the problem in a bit more detail for me. I was bitten by this kernel/gcc issue myself, and having looked at those bug reports I'm still not clear what was happening, other than that gcc-2.95 was somehow breaking g++/libstdc++ in testing. Just curious. -- Jeremy Hankins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PGP fingerprint: 748F 4D16 538E 75D6 8333 9E10 D212 B5ED 37D0 0A03