Re: GCC 3.2 standard?

2002-12-07 Thread Steinar Bang
> Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Nathanael Nerode writes: >> Hmm. Care to share what that transition plan looks like so far? > http://people.debian.org/~rmurray/ I couldn't help noticing that http://people.debian.org/~rmurray/c++transition.html > has the text "This is a prop

Re: GCC 3.2 standard?

2002-12-05 Thread Matthias Klose
Nathanael Nerode writes: > Matthias Klose wrote: > >we need to make g++-3.2 the standard C++ compiler at the same time, or > >else we get problems linking binaries with g++, where some C modules > >are built with gcc-3.2. We are currently working on a transition plan. > > Hmm. Care to share what

Re: GCC 3.2 standard?

2002-12-04 Thread Nathanael Nerode
Matthias Klose wrote: >we need to make g++-3.2 the standard C++ compiler at the same time, or >else we get problems linking binaries with g++, where some C modules >are built with gcc-3.2. We are currently working on a transition plan. Hmm. Care to share what that transition plan looks like so fa

Re: GCC 3.2 standard?

2002-12-01 Thread Matthias Klose
Nathanael Nerode writes: > Just curious, what exactly still needs to be done before gcc 3.2 can > become the standard system compiler for sid? we need to make g++-3.2 the standard C++ compiler at the same time, or else we get problems linking binaries with g++, where some C modules are built with

GCC 3.2 standard?

2002-11-30 Thread Nathanael Nerode
Just curious, what exactly still needs to be done before gcc 3.2 can become the standard system compiler for sid? Maybe I can do some of it?... --Nathanael