| 1 |
On Wed, 29 Aug 2012 15:17:48 -0700 |
| 2 |
Diego Elio Pettenò <flameeyes@×××××××××.eu> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On 29/08/2012 15:16, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 5 |
> >>> > > Also, some people are probably going to try to get some |
| 6 |
> >>> > > pkgconf support directly into gcc, in form of '-something |
| 7 |
> >>> > > libfoo' to make it grab everything magically, I think. |
| 8 |
> >> > |
| 9 |
> >> > You have a future as a comedian. |
| 10 |
> > Sir, you are going too far. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> I'm just saying that relying on something like that is a ludicrous |
| 13 |
> notion. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Okay so somebody might actually try to do that, not going to debate |
| 16 |
> that — people have been out of their mind before. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> But developers actually relying on it? I find it very hard, as that |
| 19 |
> basically means you're introducing build systems that only ever work |
| 20 |
> on a theoretical GCC 4.8 _and nothing else_. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> So can you see what makes me laugh in your statement? |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
So you haven't seen GNU Makefiles, do you? |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
Best regards, |
| 28 |
Michał Górny |
Archives