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

Re: gcc 3.2 is now the default compiler in unstable

On Wed, Jan 08, 2003 at 10:38:18PM +0100, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
> I haven't checked, but I would expect that migration of gcc-defaults 
> itself would render a number of packages in testing uninstallable, 
> because they happen to depend on earlier gcc versions (on purpose or by 
> mistake).

Why would something depend on gcc? (I'm not talking about
Build-Dependencies of course) Even if some exotic package would depend
on gcc, this would be no big scale problem for testing.

libstdc++ might be another story, though...


<canard> this is the END OF THE WORLD !
<doogie> so, anyone for tetrinet?

Reply to: