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

Re: gcc 3.2 transition in unstable

Adam Heath writes:
> On Sun, 5 Jan 2003, Ryan Murray wrote:
> >      * If you maintain a library written in C++:
> > [snip]
> Er, won't we *have* to specify build-depends on gcc >= 3.2?  Otherwise, the
> maintainer will have changed the package names, and modified the .shlibs, but
> the buildds will attempt to build against some random gcc.

yes, the build-depends should include "gcc (>= 3:3.2)", and
build-essentials should be changed as well.

Reply to: