| 1 |
M. Edward Borasky wrote: |
| 2 |
> 1. You might want to post this to "gentoo-science"; that's where most |
| 3 |
> FORTRAN aficionados, like myself, hang out. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
added to CC. for those of you who just tuned in, this thread started at: |
| 6 |
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/22747 |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
> 2. How far "very ahead-of-time" are we talking here? I haven't heard |
| 9 |
> anything about GCC 4.x on the R mailing lists, which is where I'd expect |
| 10 |
> to see the most scrambling about and beta-testing. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
my guess is slightly less than 2 months before the release branch is |
| 13 |
made. the stated goal for making a release branch is less than 100 |
| 14 |
regressions, and there are currently about 200 targeted at 4.0. also |
| 15 |
objc++ support was supposed to be merged in before release, and that |
| 16 |
hasnt even happened yet... so i might be overly optimistic in that |
| 17 |
guesstimate. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
i'm mainly working on gcc4 stuff now because it's even more strict than |
| 20 |
3.4 in regards to what it will and will not compile. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> 3. I think rather than going with your ebuild, I'll build the whole |
| 23 |
> thing in a user-space account from virgin upstream downloads. The "whole |
| 24 |
> thing" in this case would be GCC 4, a development release of the Atlas |
| 25 |
> linear algebra library, and a development release of R and its packages. |
| 26 |
> That way it's easier for me to figure out who's messed up without |
| 27 |
> burdening Gentoo with upstream bugs. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
sounds like a good idea :) |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Travis Tilley |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives