[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: gcc-3.4 ready?

On 04-Aug-11 09:42, Andreas Kn?pfer wrote:
> hi everybody,
> there has been some posts here a while ago saying that the /gcc-3.4 repository 
> is not yet ready, missing packages etc...
> now, i'm wondering if it is ready for regular use. is it regarded as stable as 
> the /pure64 version?
> i'd like to convert my workstation to the gcc-3.4 branch if you suggest so. 
> i've been very happy with i386/unstable for years and don't care about minor 
> problems from time to time.
> it is much more important which branch (pure64 or gcc-3.4) will be more 
> up-to-date in the long run. am i right to assume that /pure64 will be 
> deprecated eventually in favour of /gcc-3.4?

There has not been any decision whether the pure64/gcc-3.3 archive will
be dropped in favor the the amd64/gcc-3.4 archive. There are some 300
packages more available in the pure64/gcc-3.3 archive than in the 
amd64/gcc-3.4 amd64/gcc-3.4 at the moment (~8300 vs. ~8000 packages).
I think that the amd64/gcc-3.4 archive will catch up in the next two 
weeks so that nearly the same number of packages will be available 
in both archives. However, the amd64/gcc-3.4 archive will still need a 
few extra gcc-3.4 related fixes compared to the official sid/sarge 
distribution. These are mostly minor one-line C/C++ standards compliance 
fixes, but patches to the official packages will be necessary 
nevertheless for these issues.

As for stability, I am using the packages from the amd64/gcc-3.4 archive 
myself on three machines (on my main desktop and on two servers) since a
few weeks without any problems. From my own experience I would say
that the stability is almost the same as for i386/unstable.

Andreas Jochens

Reply to: