Re: KDE3 - Debian/experimental distribution proposal

[Brian Nelson <nelson@bignachos.com>]

Alan Chandler <alan@chandlerfamily.org.uk> writes:

> On Saturday 19 October 2002 4:48 pm, Noel Koethe wrote:
>
>>
>> We will still wait for the gcc 3.2 transition for unstable.
>
> I know that is what is happening - what nobody has answered completely yet is 
> WHY you can't put 2.95 compiled packages in to unstable at first and then 
> follow up later with 3.2 compiled versions (with the different names if that 
> is what the plan entails - or just later versions if not).

Or, my variation of the question: Why not just build-depend on g++-3.2,
build the packages and their dependencies (anything other than Qt?)
explicitly with g++-3.2, and upload to unstable or experimental.  Once
the transition has taken place, revert to just building with g++ and
everything should work out fine.

I think there are problems with binutils and gcc-3.2 on certain arches
which would break KDE on those arches, but it would probably be better
in the long run to live with those problems for now.

-- 
People said I was dumb, but I proved them!