On Mon, 2003-01-06 at 20:17, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Mon, Jan 06, 2003 at 11:52:20PM +0000, Faheem Mitha wrote: > > On Mon, 6 Jan 2003 18:54:20 +0000, Eduardo Pérez Ureta > > <eperez@it.uc3m.es> wrote: > > > > We would have one package for gcc-2.95 and other one for gcc-3.2 but > > > once all programs start to be compiled with the gcc-3.2 libraries the > > > gcc-2.95 libraries can be purged out of Debian. > > > Excuse me for butting in, but I was wondering if the plan is to remove > > all earlier version of gcc from unstable once the transition is > > complete? The reason I am asking is that gdb currently has problem > > when used with g++-3.1 or later (known issues, I believe), and > > g++-2.95 does not support things I need, so I usually wind up using > > g++-3.0 with gdb. I'm not sure what I will do if Debian changes things > > so that only gcc-3.2 or later can be installed, but it will certainly > > make things more difficult for me with regard to debugging. > > I believe that the plan is to remove old vesrions of gcc from unstable > once the transition is *complete*; but it is not a *complete* transition > until there are no packages in the archive which build-depend on older > versions of gcc. > > If there are packages that don't work well with gcc 3.2, however, don't > wait to file the bugs. Agreed here. IMHO the best way to atack the broken packages is to file bugs once they stop working when the transition has begun. -- Sean Harshbarger http://coaster.sourceforge.net Coaster - The Gnome CD Burner
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part