On 11/29/2016 12:46 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
> It was not just to delay to v5
To avoid similar disasters in the future, please note that any
"decision" to "delay until vX" is essentially invalid when there is no
consensus regarding vX branching: A promise to delay something until the
moment others
On 11/29/2016 11:22 AM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
> On 29/11/2016 4:40 p.m., Alex Rousskov wrote:
>> On 11/28/2016 07:29 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
>>> GCC 4.8 is not capable of building correctly operating Squid-4
>>
>> You have said that before, but in all such cases that I remember, the
>> reality was
On 29/11/2016 8:46 p.m., Christos Tsantilas wrote:
> On 29/11/2016 04:29 πμ, Amos Jeffries wrote:
>> Please note that GCC 4.8 is not capable of building correctly operating
>> Squid-4 either. So its not a matter of GCC 4.8 vs Squid.
>
> The 4.8 does not have any problem. I was doing all of my deve
On 29/11/2016 4:40 p.m., Alex Rousskov wrote:
> On 11/28/2016 07:29 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
>> GCC 4.8 is not capable of building correctly operating Squid-4
>
> You have said that before, but in all such cases that I remember, the
> reality was actually different. I do not know if something has
On 29/11/2016 04:29 πμ, Amos Jeffries wrote:
Please note that GCC 4.8 is not capable of building correctly operating
Squid-4 either. So its not a matter of GCC 4.8 vs Squid.
The 4.8 does not have any problem. I was doing all of my developments
and tests using GCC-4.8 and never found a problem,
On 11/28/2016 07:29 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
> GCC 4.8 is not capable of building correctly operating Squid-4
You have said that before, but in all such cases that I remember, the
reality was actually different. I do not know if something has changed
in v4 within the past month or so [but any such
Please note that GCC 4.8 is not capable of building correctly operating
Squid-4 either. So its not a matter of GCC 4.8 vs Squid. It is a
question of whether GCC 4.9 is still the newest available GCC on any OS.
Sadly it seems needed still for CentOS 7 and probably RHEL 7 too.
On 29/11/2016 11:
On 11/28/2016 07:46 PM, Alex Rousskov wrote:
Please undo that commit and let's discuss whether switching from
libregex to std::regex now is a good idea.
Thank you,
Alex.
Has anybody considered using RE2?
It is a regex library that is fast, C++ source, high quality, public domain,
and is s
On 11/25/2016 06:39 AM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
> On 25/11/2016 11:50 p.m., Christos Tsantilas wrote:
>> I have problems to run latest squid-5. The reason looks that it is the
>> r14954, which removes old GnuRegex and uses the std::regex API.
>>
>> The std::regex supported from gcc-4.9 and latest rele
On 11/25/2016 03:39 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
If you want to look at legality;
Part of the LTS contract is that software feature changes are *not*
done. The clients have chosen to make that a requirement. The OS
distributors have chosen to meet it. Nothing to do with what Squid
Project does in o
On 25/11/2016 11:50 p.m., Christos Tsantilas wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have problems to run latest squid-5. The reason looks that it is the
> r14954, which removes old GnuRegex and uses the std::regex API.
>
> The std::regex supported from gcc-4.9 and latest releases and I am still
> using an gcc-
Hi all,
I have problems to run latest squid-5. The reason looks that it is
the r14954, which removes old GnuRegex and uses the std::regex API.
The std::regex supported from gcc-4.9 and latest releases and I am still
using an gcc-4.8.4 on my kubuntu-14.04 LTS release.
OK, I can upgrade to
12 matches
Mail list logo
