| 1 |
> 2004.0/2004.1? time warp? 2005.0/.1? |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
Heh, whoops, stupid Rob. 2005.0. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
> ^^ yeah sure like we will have more devs help test a new toolchain, you |
| 6 |
> forget it doesnt come with translucency and shadows, something that |
| 7 |
> guarantees you plenty of (dev) testers, what's gcc, just some thing |
| 8 |
> portage calls to build stuff, who would care about that? |
| 9 |
> so much easier to complain about things than help fix them |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
True. But if it happens, and gcc-4.0 is in 2005.0, and all sorts of |
| 12 |
stuff breaks because the devs ignored our pleas to test, then they can't |
| 13 |
say we didn't warn them. Just like, well, what's happening with 3.4 and |
| 14 |
~x86... |
Archives