| 1 |
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sun, 09 Jul 2006 21:37:47 +0200 Jakub Moc <jakub@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> | Molle Bestefich wrote: |
| 4 |
> | > I noticed that several users have commented with a relevant |
| 5 |
> | > complaint: GCC-4.x is required by the ebuild, but no information is |
| 6 |
> | > ever conveyed to the end user about this fact. The ebuild does not |
| 7 |
> | > have a dependency on GCC-4.x. |
| 8 |
> | |
| 9 |
> | No, it's not. gcc-3.4.x *is* required. That versions (or later) is |
| 10 |
> | *stable* everywhere where xine-lib is stable. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Not true. According to the 2006.0 x86 profile, for example, you're |
| 13 |
> required to have ">=sys-devel/gcc-3.3.4-r1". There is no requirement |
| 14 |
> that 3.4 be installed. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Yeah, that's not what I've been talking about at all, what's your point? |
| 18 |
I was saying that gcc-3.4 and better is stable everywhere where it's |
| 19 |
needed. How does it change that 3.3 is dead as a nail in a lamproom door |
| 20 |
and users should switch to something that we actually can support? |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
Best regards, |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Jakub Moc |
| 27 |
mailto:jakub@g.o |
| 28 |
GPG signature: |
| 29 |
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCEBA3D9E |
| 30 |
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
... still no signature ;) |
Archives