On Wed, 2005-11-30 at 17:34 -0500, Philip Webb wrote: > As one of the "masses", I am certainly disturbed at that implication. > I don't remember any such need when I upgraded 2.9.5 -> 3.x (now 3.3.6). > This is the kind of issue on which I trust the devs to do sensible things, > but do we really need to rebuild our whole systems from the ground up ?
Lots of things broke way back then, too. Also, there wasn't even slotted gcc ebuilds back then, so it really is hard to compare. There were a lot of things done in the past that were really broken that we have since learned from... > Ordinarily, I upgrade packages individually when it seems appropriate > & never do 'emerge world' with or without '-e' or other flags; > I do 'esync' every weekend & look at what is marked as having changed. Technically, you don't need to rebuild world. You only need to rebuild stuff that uses C++ and links to libstdc++. > I would very much appreciate a doc somewhere > which explains the advantages of moving to 3.4 > & why a wholesale ground-up rebuild is necessary, if indeed it is. > As always, my thanks to those who do the volunteer work. Well, the "advantages" are simple. Upstream no longer supports 3.3 anymore. They barely support 3.4, but having some support from upstream is better than none. This means 3.3 will be relegated to a legacy version and likely won't be updated except for security bugs. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead x86 Architecture Team Games - Developer Gentoo Linux
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
