On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 08:51:27PM +0200, wrobell wrote: > On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 12:34:52PM +0200, Bartosz Taudul wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 09:56:10AM +0200, wrobell wrote: > > > > Author: pluto Date: Fri Jul 2 20:25:43 2004 GMT > > > > Module: SPECS Tag: DEVEL > > > > ---- Log message: > > > > - 3.4.1 released. > > > when will it be merged on head? > > Probably when, akhem, akhem, RM will start making AC-branches. 3.4.x > > cannot be included in AC because it would require rebuilding all stuff > > dependant on libstdc++. > Why gcc for AC is not on AC branch (as other packages, i.e. rpm)? Answer > this question for yourself, please.
rpm isn't good example, I think that version from HEAD will go to Ac... > So, questions remains, is there any technical (besides AC > mess) reason for keeping gcc 3.4.1 on DEVEL branch? [1] > > wrobell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > [1] By asking the question I do not want to discuss AC > problems. I just want to know if gcc 3.4.1 is ready to use > (there is no todo in the spec, so I want just to be sure). sb should test it, at least if gcc 3.4.1 is capable to bootstrap _itself_ on all archs. Now I know only that it builds (using gcc 3.3.4) on x86, amd64, alpha and sparc; today or tomorrow we'll know if it builds on ppc (see ac-test). I don't know why it failed on i586, probably some builder problem. -- Jakub Bogusz http://cyber.cs.net.pl/~qboosh/ _______________________________________________ pld-devel-en mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
