On 28.02.2011 12:49, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org> (28/02/2011): >> wasn't built before. > > strictly speaking, yes. But since we're talking about a gcc package, > that *could* be considered as a regression from previous versions… But > what a hairy reasoning! maybe, but then, it's an indication that the port is not maintained.