| 1 |
Am Samstag, den 18.08.2012, 01:44 -0400 schrieb Mike Frysinger: |
| 2 |
> On Saturday 18 August 2012 01:16:29 Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: |
| 3 |
> > - everything depending on boost (current 1.49 won't work, you need |
| 4 |
> > 1.50, and quite a few things break with 1.50); |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> there's a trivial patch needed to make 1.49 work. forcing people to use 1.50 |
| 7 |
> is purely the boost's maintainers choice. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
I'm already working on some of the boost-1.49/50 breakages and 1.51 is |
| 10 |
already in the pipeline, so 1.50 has to leave p.mask in a month or so |
| 11 |
anyway. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> > - everything depending on gnutls (current 2.x version does not build |
| 15 |
> > with glibc 2.16, and quite a few things don't build with gnutls 3); |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> there's a trivial patch long been available that you've refused to merge. so |
| 18 |
> any errors here are of your choosing. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> > Congrats, this is just the kind of behaviour that makes Gentoo look |
| 21 |
> > professional... no wait I meant the other way around I guess. Because |
| 22 |
> > the automake 1.12 breakage is not enough to have in tree, hm? |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> *yawn*. don't use unstable if you want stability. |
| 25 |
> -mike |
Archives