Re: KDE3 - Debian/experimental distribution proposal
Alan Chandler <firstname.lastname@example.org> 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!