| 1 |
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 23:36:33 +0100 |
| 2 |
Rémi Cardona <remi@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Newbie idea : g++ and boost both provide virtual/tr1 |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Newbie question : besides the fact that you would have to rebuild |
| 7 |
> packages if you changed the virtual, is there anything painfully |
| 8 |
> obvious why that would be a bad idea ? |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
And what exactly is required of a package providing virtual/tr1? If it |
| 11 |
has to implement the entirity of the TR, then g++-4.1 can't provide the |
| 12 |
virtual and the purpose is lost since the most used parts of the |
| 13 |
extension will be those provided by GCC. If, on the other hand, you |
| 14 |
require the virtual to provide only the parts currently implemented in |
| 15 |
g++, what happens in the future for packages that require other parts |
| 16 |
of the tr1 extension? |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
-- |
| 19 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives