Philip Blundell writes: > I think our current "gcc 2.95.4" is stable enough, and sufficiently better > than the 2.95.2 in potato, that we should consider making new packages to go > into 2.2r4 or whatever the next version is going to be. I guess this should > be straightforward enough to achieve. > > Anybody object to this? If not, I guess I'll start working on it.
Not at all :-) you might want to have a look at master.debian.org:~doko/www/gcc-potato. This is a potato package of a pre 2.95.3, which still uses the unversioned gcc names (which I would prefer for potato packages). the current 2.95.4 doesn't builf on s390, but 2.95.3, so it might be necessary to add a reverse-diff (for woody as well). Matthias