At 9:05 Uhr -0500 12.12.2002, David R. Morrison wrote:
Branching would not be a problem.Ben, don't we have to do something about that new environment variable, whatever it is, before we get users to upgrade? (I can't recall and haven't installed the new tools yet myself.)This might require the release of a new version of the package manager, which sets that environment variable? I'm a bit concerned, BTW, about the status of the package manager. As far as I could see when this was actively being discussed, the -isystem business is going to cause trouble with some handful of packages, and this means that someone needs to take charge of getting those packages fixed up and investigating the whole business before that change is released to the user community (or at least, before it becomes stable). On the other hand, there are various minor fixes such as this new environment variable which need to see the light of day sooner rather than later. Can anybody suggest a strategy here?
To me it sees a larger portions of the issues caused by the -isystem changes could be resolved by adding a "-w" (to turn off warnings), as was discussed previously.
In the worst case, we can revert those changes, of course.
Finally, we should not relay on the December tools before late January, I'd say, and even then I am not happy about this. In the very least, packages relaying on that version of the dev tools should check for them and error out. I don't expect the average joe to update unless they have to.
Max
--
-----------------------------------------------
Max Horn
Software Developer
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:
With Great Power, Comes Great Responsibility Learn to use your power at OSDN's High Performance Computing Channel
http://hpc.devchannel.org/
_______________________________________________
Fink-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
