On Sat, Oct 12, 2002 at 09:13:16AM -0400, Steve M. Robbins wrote: > I'm preparing a new version of the BOOST C++ libraries for upload in > the next week or so. Supposing I wanted to provide packages for both > the default gcc and for gcc 3.2. What are people's thoughts on: > a) Is this a good idea or stupid idea? > b) Can I make the lib packages co-installable? > c) If (b), what naming convention for the libs is advisable? It's possible some of the toolchain maintainers will disagree with this, but at this point I would suggest that any new packages should be built for g++ 3.2 *only*. Building new libraries for g++ 2.9x now will just add to the volume of packages that need to be transitioned. If these BOOST C++ libs are already in the archive, then you should probably continue using the default toolchain for the time being, unless you're planning on spearheading the transition plan. :) Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
pgpqVp77OQFTR.pgp
Description: PGP signature