| 1 |
considering that kde 3.2 compiled flawless with gcc 3.4.1 shows it is |
| 2 |
the code of kde that broke, not the compiler, it merely is more strict |
| 3 |
and thus complains about stuff the c++ standard doesnt allow |
| 4 |
i still need to get kdeartwork and kdegames, time permitting i will see |
| 5 |
i can get those fixed up |
| 6 |
blame gcc 3.4 if you think you can justify it, kdeartwork didnt compile |
| 7 |
with gcc3.3 for other devs, so moot point what compiler ;) |
| 8 |
no, something not even compiling with gcc3.3 isnt "quite stable" |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
luckily i only build gnome and kde for testing with gcc 3.4 sake anyway :) |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Phil Richards wrote: |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
>On 2004-07-28, Norberto Bensa <norberto+gentoo-dev@×××××××××.cx> wrote: |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
>> Caleb Tennis wrote: |
| 19 |
>> |
| 20 |
>> |
| 21 |
>>>I didn't intend for it to be package.mask'd - it's quite stable, we want to |
| 22 |
>>> |
| 23 |
>>> |
| 24 |
>> I disagree. |
| 25 |
>> I use kde 3.3_beta2, and no, it's not stable enough for daily usage. |
| 26 |
>> |
| 27 |
>> |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
>Isn't that what using ~x86 you might expect? If there is |
| 30 |
>a view that the beta is generally ok (and it clearly doesn't |
| 31 |
>cause problems for everybody) then ~x86 seems reasonable to get |
| 32 |
>the ebuilds sorted out ready for "full" release of 3.3. |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
>> I'm using gcc 3.4.1; maybe that's the cause... :-? |
| 37 |
>> |
| 38 |
>> |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
>Erm, yes, well. Using a (masked) compiler with a completely rewritten |
| 41 |
>C++ frontend might *just* have a minor impact on a system written |
| 42 |
>entirely in C++ :-) |
| 43 |
> |
| 44 |
>phil |
| 45 |
> |
| 46 |
> |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
-- |
| 49 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives