Re: libstdc++... Help please
Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> If I understood correctly, part of the problem is/was that some of the
> rebuilds simply didn't work because of problems with the new compilers.
> The current tools don't allow programs of arch X into testing if they fail to
> build on arch Y. I think that in general this is a good idea.
I disagree. The net effect is that the program gets less testing, resulting in less bugs found and fixed.
> I don't know if this is comparable, but my experience with non-ix86 Linux
> kernels is that if the people responsible for them allow their version to
> fall behind on the bleeding-edge kernel, the resulting split might be
> permanent. :-/
The big difference is that one kernel version is not allowed to stop the progress in all others. If a non-ix86 kernel falls behind, only that kernel suffers. In Debian, all ports suffer if one port breaks.