| 1 |
Harry Putnam <reader <at> newsguy.com> writes: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> >> Can anyone offer an informed opinion as to whether the wiki pages |
| 5 |
> >> at: https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Upgrading_GCC |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
First glance it seems updated. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> >> Are current and apply as well to the newest gcc versions? |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
GCC-5.2? Several folks have posted to a thread that gcc-5.2 |
| 12 |
is working great.... |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
> > You may not have noticed but at the bottom of each wiki page there is |
| 16 |
> > a timestamp: |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
> Ha... thanks for the nudge ... somewhere in the back of my pea brain, |
| 19 |
> I think I once new that... |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> So, if the emerge of gcc ever finishes ... hehe. I'll follow on thru. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> > "This page was last modified on 11 August 2015, at 20:29." |
| 24 |
> > |
| 25 |
> > While I don't take this as a verification of correctness, I usually do |
| 26 |
> > consider it an indication of not-completely-wrongness. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
True. What I find is often the fringe or edge cases are not discussed. |
| 29 |
It's not that folks responsible for the pages do not want that sort |
| 30 |
of extra information, particular from proven, resourceful community members, |
| 31 |
it that those folks fail to file doc bugs on bgo proposing |
| 32 |
those enhancements. YOU can do that minimally, and before long |
| 33 |
(I think) you'll be able to edit some pages either directly or |
| 34 |
post them as attachments to the corresponding bug report. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
> At the very least, someone with enough privileges has visited the page. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
More work on the accuracy and completeness of the gentoo wiki is |
| 40 |
definitely warranted, so just file bgo reports of your ideas for enhancements. |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
Welcome back, Harry...... |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
James |
Archives