Re: GCC 4.2 transition
Steve Langasek writes:
> On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 12:05:54PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 11:51:47AM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > > I have another objection. I'd like all mozilla security updates to be built
> > > before gcc 4.2 becomes the default, because they don't build correctly yet,
> > > and I am (still) waiting for an upstream comment on how to fix it.
>
> > The change is done in unstable. Unstable have no security support.
> > Should I assume you don't know how to properly build packages for a dist
> > which is not unstable?
>
> He might be referring to the fact that xulrunner has been out-of-date on
> mips* for over a month now due to build failures that look like they are
> probably a gcc bug, thereby preventing security fixes (and updates to 27
> other significant packages) from reaching testing.
He was asked to report back results with a recent gcc-snapshot; did I
miss an answer?
Reply to: