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

Re: gcc 3.2 epoch?

> > Read the changelog:
> > 
> >   * Increase epoch due to wrong gpc and chill default version (closes: #163294).
> Okay (sigh).
> I wish there was some less-severe form of epoch that could operate only
> for a limited period of time, so that random mistakes don't end up
> increasing the epoch forever.

This makes me wonder: what is so wrong with an epoch ?
It's mostly invisible to most interfaces, 
and only used internally.


Reply to: