Which is what the first message of the thread said. We've come full
circle :)
geir
Tim Ellison wrote:
Egor Pasko wrote:
I am OK with all. Some comments:
* we should explicitly say that it is a GNU make.
* the more restrictive GCC, the better. What is the most restrictive
now? gcc-4.1?
P.S.: I personally like diversity in tool chains. Let's make a single
configuration not a must, but a matter of priority. So, we can
consider achieving good results on these two toolchains as the first
priority and fix bugs there first. Not because there should be only
one, but because there should be at least one.
Does it feel comfortable to everyone?
I fully agree with you Egor, this can be a principal tool chain but we
will be keen to hear about problems from anyone and we will strive to
fix our code where it will help. Of course, we will have dependencies
on minimum and maybe maximum (e.g. Ant ;-) ) versions known to work.
Regards,
Tim
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
