On 29 Nov 2008, at 19:43, Frank J. R. Hanstick wrote:
Hello,
Frank
On Nov 29, 2008, at 2:46 PM, Neil wrote:
On 29 Nov 2008, at 16:46, Frank J. R. Hanstick wrote:
I think preventing usage during an upgrade process would be far
superior to using and having links severed during usage..
Okay, so I'm upgrading gcc43, going from 4.3.1 to 4.3.2 (current).
It's going to take 2 hours say. You find it superior that MacPorts
should (somehow) stop me from using gcc 4.3.1 to perhaps write a
couple hello-world sized test cases while it's compiling gcc 4.3.2
instead of just compiling 4.3.2 elsewhere, and then swapping them
out when it's done?
Kindly permit me to draw you an analogy: You want to buy a new
car. The search for a new car will take 3 weeks. You find it
superior that I take away your current car while you're shopping
for the new car, instead of letting you use your current car up
until you find a new car, and then swapping them?
And I will give you an even better example. Your compilation is 30
seconds from finished and the links to gcc are lost, then what? You
prefer to have your compilation crash? Your analogy is MBE. The
car you have is not linked to one being upgraded. It would be like
your current car suddenly quitting while your are driving it in the
middle of the freeway because the new model is now ready. Get a
better analogy.
If your compilation is going to take that long, then it wouldn't
finish under either scenario; so there is nothing to lose. But if
your compilation is 30 seconds shorter, then under your scenario is
fails, and under the current scenario it doesn't.
-N.
_______________________________________________
macports-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
