| 1 |
On Wed, 2005-11-30 at 17:34 -0500, Philip Webb wrote: |
| 2 |
> As one of the "masses", I am certainly disturbed at that implication. |
| 3 |
> I don't remember any such need when I upgraded 2.9.5 -> 3.x (now 3.3.6). |
| 4 |
> This is the kind of issue on which I trust the devs to do sensible things, |
| 5 |
> but do we really need to rebuild our whole systems from the ground up ? |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
Lots of things broke way back then, too. Also, there wasn't even |
| 8 |
slotted gcc ebuilds back then, so it really is hard to compare. There |
| 9 |
were a lot of things done in the past that were really broken that we |
| 10 |
have since learned from... |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
> Ordinarily, I upgrade packages individually when it seems appropriate |
| 13 |
> & never do 'emerge world' with or without '-e' or other flags; |
| 14 |
> I do 'esync' every weekend & look at what is marked as having changed. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Technically, you don't need to rebuild world. You only need to rebuild |
| 17 |
stuff that uses C++ and links to libstdc++. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> I would very much appreciate a doc somewhere |
| 20 |
> which explains the advantages of moving to 3.4 |
| 21 |
> & why a wholesale ground-up rebuild is necessary, if indeed it is. |
| 22 |
> As always, my thanks to those who do the volunteer work. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Well, the "advantages" are simple. Upstream no longer supports 3.3 |
| 25 |
anymore. They barely support 3.4, but having some support from upstream |
| 26 |
is better than none. This means 3.3 will be relegated to a legacy |
| 27 |
version and likely won't be updated except for security bugs. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
Chris Gianelloni |
| 31 |
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead |
| 32 |
x86 Architecture Team |
| 33 |
Games - Developer |
| 34 |
Gentoo Linux |
Archives