--- Comment #1 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-02 17:51 ---
I suspect we should put the version number, or at least major.minor,
into the name. So, libgcj-4.1.pc, libgcj-4.2.pc, etc.
What do you think of this?
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
--- Comment #2 from gerald at pfeifer dot com 2006-10-09 19:46 ---
Making the major.minor number (4.1, 4.2,...) part of the name sounds quite
fine to me!
(Sorry for the delay in responding to your question, Tom. I've been out last
week.)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cg
--- Comment #3 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-10 17:19 ---
Testing a patch.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|u
--- Comment #4 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-10 18:44 ---
Subject: Bug 29205
Author: tromey
Date: Tue Oct 10 18:44:06 2006
New Revision: 117610
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=117610
Log:
PR libgcj/29205:
* Makefile.in: Rebuilt.
--- Comment #5 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-10 18:45 ---
I've checked in the fix on the trunk.
Do we need this in 4.1? I assume not on the theory that
now the file names won't clash...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29205
--- Comment #6 from gerald at pfeifer dot com 2006-10-21 11:28 ---
Thanks, Tom! I updated some packages I maintain and verified that this
indeed nicely fixes the problem.
As for GCC 4.1, as you say, I don't think it's strictly needed, though it
could be useful for some (using GCC 4.0 a
--- Comment #7 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-21 21:49 ---
I'm going to close this as fixed.
Thanks Gerald.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
