Re: practices for porters (was Re: large number of source package ...)
On 27 Sep 1998, Adam P. Harris wrote:
apharr>You imply that this information is wrong. However, I've found that
apharr>it's far better to stick with the generic names and assume that
apharr>porters have the proper compilation environment (as well as a hell of
apharr>a lot easier to maintain in the long run).
Yes, I guess you are correct. However, I find a few packages that
need one of gcc or egcs, so the packager should take note of what is
being called when she uses 'cc'.
Anyway, I seem to remember someone somewhere encouraging us to
compile code with egcc , which is why I started doing it...
John Lapeyre <lapeyre@physics.arizona.edu>
Tucson,AZ http://www.physics.arizona.edu/~lapeyre
Reply to: