On Sun, 2012-03-18 at 23:59 +0200, Andrew wrote:
> 18.03.2012 19:44, davidMbrooke пишет:
> >
> > I'm also thinking about what the "ARCH" arguments to buildtool.pl and
> > buildpacket.pl should look like. Maybe we just use the GCC "target
> > triplet" syntax, so e.g.
> > i486-pc-linux-uclibc
Hi;
just a few words about my reasons to talk about 5.x in trac.
'next' is always good for new branch to develop the forthcoming major
version, but what will call the version after 'next', if "next" shoud be
the stable name? "Overnext"? This is meaningless IMHO :)
Another option is choose a comp
Hi all,
I plan to start making changes to the Wiki pages for 'next', adding info
on cross-compiling and giving some more thought as to which pages are
common to all Bering-uClibc versions (maybe the Hints and Tips on Git
usage, for example?) and which are version-specific.
Before I create more pa
Everyone,
Git project seeks discussion on "push" change
https://lwn.net/Articles/487131/#Comments
--
Mike Noyes
http://sourceforge.net/users/mhnoyes
https://profiles.google.com/mhnoyes
--
This SF email is sponsosred by:
Am 18.03.2012 17:18, schrieb Yves Blusseau:
> Really good news !
>
> Thanks a lot david an kp !
Don't forget Andrew!
> When do you think you will merge the 'next' branch onto 'master' ?
Speaking for myself, support for other CPU's than x86 is one of our
major targets for the 5.x series. So the
