1 |
On Tue, 21 Feb 2012 10:26:38 +0100 |
2 |
Pacho Ramos <pacho@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> El lun, 20-02-2012 a las 20:02 -0600, Ryan Hill escribió: |
5 |
> > On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 17:17:30 -0800 |
6 |
> > Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o> wrote: |
7 |
> > |
8 |
> > > On 02/20/2012 05:03 PM, Ryan Hill wrote: |
9 |
> > > > On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 21:34:14 +0100 |
10 |
> > > > Pacho Ramos <pacho@g.o> wrote: |
11 |
> > > > |
12 |
> > > >> I don't know if this has been discussed before but, what issues are |
13 |
> > > >> preventing us from unmasking gcc-4.6 (and think on a near |
14 |
> > > >> stabilization)? |
15 |
> > > >> |
16 |
> > > >> I have read hardmask message but it simply explains that it's masked for |
17 |
> > > >> testing purposes :-/ |
18 |
> > > > |
19 |
> > > > Grub is the only blocker. I don't want to unmask something that makes |
20 |
> > > > people's systems unbootable. |
21 |
> > > > |
22 |
> > > > I'm also out of ideas and open to suggestions. |
23 |
> > > |
24 |
> > > Stabilize grub-1.99, and modify the grub-0.9x ebuilds to die if they |
25 |
> > > can't find a supported compiler. |
26 |
> > |
27 |
> > What's the state of 1.99? I know someone was working on it recently. We'd |
28 |
> > also have to update the handbooks. I think it could be several months of |
29 |
> > work to get it ready, and I'd like to unmask 4.6 last September. |
30 |
> |
31 |
> As looks like fixing old grub is far away because nobody know what is |
32 |
> causing that issues, probably trying to get grub-1.99 ready for |
33 |
> stabilization would be interesting (we will need to do that sooner or |
34 |
> later anyway) |
35 |
|
36 |
We should probably work on getting it keyworded first. ;) But yeah, this |
37 |
might be the good reason needed to push it forward. |
38 |
|
39 |
|
40 |
-- |
41 |
fonts, gcc-porting |
42 |
toolchain, wxwidgets |
43 |
@ gentoo.org |