| 1 |
Just curious. Who are you sending patches to? Gentoo scripters, or |
| 2 |
independent QT/GTK developers? |
| 3 |
What kind of patches are you refering to? Gcc3.2 or kernel patches? |
| 4 |
Why arent any patches in the cvs tree? How many questions can I fit |
| 5 |
onto one paragraph? |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
I'm kind of confused as I thought that pretty much all gentoo related |
| 8 |
code were script based. If this is not the case, then is it possible to |
| 9 |
get a list of gentoo specific modules that may be affected by future GCC |
| 10 |
upgrades? I ask this because I tend to use the latest GCC CVS |
| 11 |
snapshots for my development (currently gcc 3.1.3). |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Michael Mattsson |
| 16 |
Kyrana Inc. |
| 17 |
michel@××××××.com |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
> -----Original Message----- |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
> 3.2 is labeled by GNU to be 100% multi-vender compliant with |
| 24 |
> the C++ ABI |
| 25 |
> now. Which is the core prob with the new gcc releases. By skipping |
| 26 |
> straight to 3.2 we'll avoid 2 problem transitions.. 1 from |
| 27 |
> 2.95 to 3.1 |
| 28 |
> and then from 3.1/3.1.1 to 3.2 instead we'll have 2.95 to |
| 29 |
> 3.2. As one of |
| 30 |
> the gcc-3.1/gcc-3.2 Gentoo guys I support this plan (was one |
| 31 |
> of the ones |
| 32 |
> calling for it among the devs) and I'm working hard with all |
| 33 |
> the other |
| 34 |
> guys to send upstream patches to developers to make sure their |
| 35 |
> applications are ready for the new gcc-3.2 platform. (this |
| 36 |
> will benefit |
| 37 |
> all distros). |
| 38 |
> |
| 39 |
> -- |
| 40 |
> Doug Goldstein |
| 41 |
> Developer (Laptops, WiFi, GCC-3.1) |
| 42 |
> Gentoo Linux |
| 43 |
> http://www.gentoo.org/~cardoe/ |
| 44 |
> |
Archives