Christopher C. Chimelis writes:
>
> On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, Matthias Klose wrote:
>
> > I don't like the current situation. we have a gcc version in woody
> > that should be removed and version in sid, which doesn't
> > propagate.
>
> What's the hold-up on the sid->woody move for gcc-3.0 (I haven't seen
> update-excuses yet)? I can't think of any reason to keep the version in
> woody around at all...
A report to remove the ABI incompatible version was filed 60 days ago.
#98614. We didn't like RedHat to distribute an unreleased,
incompatible version, but now we do the same with a now incompatible
pre-3.0 version.
The version in sid has "serious" bugs:
#106252 - ia64 patch for the packaging, already in CVS.
#103980 - [PR c++/3702] gcc-3.0 copies constructors, a build error
in the sfs package.
#105246: - [PR c++/3774 arm] can't compile a trivial program including
<string>
Only the last one should be serious. But I doubt it can offset the
severeness of #98614.
