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

Re: gcc-3.2 migration



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: pgpXf5R9xYdlv.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: