* Hamish Moffatt (hamish@debian.org) wrote: > On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 09:18:22AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote: > > anyway I'm pretty sure). Therefore I would say, no, they don't have to > > build-depend on gcc >= 2:3.2-1; it's the current default and there's > > nothing to say that someone couldn't download the source and build a > > non-c102 package from it. In fact, I imagine the 'source' portion won't > > have the c102... > > You could build a package that doesn't use the c102 ABI, but it would > have the c102 name. That could be very ugly for backporting. If you're building the package you should *handle* it then. Can we quit with this silliness *please*? It doesn't need to have depend on specific versions, and it's *not* a big deal. The default is now 3.2, let it go with that and just depend on the bloody default. Stephen Stephen
Attachment:
pgpk48itPx0Zg.pgp
Description: PGP signature