Re: gcc 4.1 or not
On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 09:56:04PM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 11:34:50AM -0700, Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> wrote:
> > On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 10:59:27AM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 10:09:11AM +0200, Domenico Andreoli <cavok@debian.org> wrote:
> > > > On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 11:10:48PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > > > > there were some requests, e.g. by Martin Michlmayr to the release team
> > > > > whether we could switch gcc to 4.1 or not for etch. As we're heading to
> > > > what about the transition to python 2.4? is it going to start or etch
> > > > is going to ship with 2.3?
> > > what about the transition to libgnutls13 ? I noticed yesterday when
> > > debootstraping that we get libgnutls11, 12 AND 13 installed by default.
> > > Do we really need that many libgnutls ?
> > I don't see anything at all in the reverse-deps that would explain
> > libgnutls11 being pulled in by debootstrap. Is it still hard-coded in a
> > package list somewhere in the version of debootstrap you're using?
> # grep-available -s Package -s Priority -P libgnutls
> (...)
> Package: libgnutls12
> Priority: standard
>
> Package: libgnutls13
> Priority: important
>
> Package: libgnutls11
> Priority: important
Cool, even better: fixable just by filing a bug on ftp.d.o asking for the
priority to be dropped.
Cheers,
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org http://www.debian.org/
Reply to: