I'm actually a little confused as to why each *package* needs the gcc:
3.1 | 3.3 flags. Its only important to which version of gcc3 we compile
with, not which code we compile.
Shouldn't fink just keep track of which gcc3 a given package was
compiled with instead of making a duplicate info file for each? i.e. In
theory foo.info with gcc: 3.1 and foo.info with gcc: 3.3 should be
identical except for that line, so why make duplicates?
If we force a given fink distro to use only one gcc3, then can't we
just make it require the correct gcc3 be used and leave it at that?
Then all the C++ code will always be from 3.3 (or 3.1).
Unless i'm very confused this would simplify it a bit, wouldn't it?
The problem is with the upgrade. What we did for the gcc 3.1 upgrade was to only force users to recompile fink packages which have C++ code in them, and allowed them to keep their already-compiled things from the previous distribution if those things did not involve C++.
I agree that it would be simpler to just use a given gcc for a given distribution, but then we would need a mechanism to force people to replace all of their fink packages (and to replace them in the correct order, if they are building from source) when they upgrade.
-- Dave
So then let's make a much more descriptive field. if a package has c++ code in it...
CPP: Yes
If a package has this and we upgrade, then build any dependancies it has that also have it. then build that package and we're happy. :-)
JP
---- It's all fun and games 'til someone writes to a NULL pointer!
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: VM Ware With VMware you can run multiple operating systems on a single machine. WITHOUT REBOOTING! Mix Linux / Windows / Novell virtual machines at the same time. Free trial click here:http://www.vmware.com/wl/offer/358/0 _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
