On 04/24/12 17:27, Michal Kubecek wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 11:22:45AM +0400, Alex Peshkoff wrote:
>> On 04/23/12 23:43, marius adrian popa wrote:
>>> I don't know if 2.1 is compiled with gcc 4.7 yet
>> As much as possible I try to use for packages on SF that version of
>> compiler which w
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 11:22:45AM +0400, Alex Peshkoff wrote:
> On 04/23/12 23:43, marius adrian popa wrote:
> > I don't know if 2.1 is compiled with gcc 4.7 yet
>
> As much as possible I try to use for packages on SF that version of
> compiler which was used to build initial release. That helps
On 04/23/12 23:43, marius adrian popa wrote:
> I don't know if 2.1 is compiled with gcc 4.7 yet
As much as possible I try to use for packages on SF that version of
compiler which was used to build initial release. That helps to avoid
possible compatibility issues for people upgrading existing sys
I don't know if 2.1 is compiled with gcc 4.7 yet
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.suse.opensuse.scm/20834/
--
For Developers, A Lot Can Happen In A Second.
Boundary is the first to Know...and Tell You.
Monitor Your Ap
