From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1EgrUI-0001D5-3F for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 28 Nov 2005 22:28:42 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id jASMRpXP022524; Mon, 28 Nov 2005 22:27:51 GMT Received: from nemesis.fprintf.net (nemesis.fprintf.net [66.134.112.218]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id jASMPKkq022655 for ; Mon, 28 Nov 2005 22:25:20 GMT Received: (qmail 23211 invoked by uid 210); 28 Nov 2005 17:53:53 -0500 Received: from 65.247.36.253 by nemesis (envelope-from , uid 201) with qmail-scanner-1.25st (clamdscan: 0.87.1/1195. spamassassin: 3.1.0. perlscan: 1.25st. Clear:RC:0(65.247.36.253):SA:0(-5.2/6.0):. Processed in 0.50105 secs); 28 Nov 2005 22:53:53 -0000 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.2 required=6.0 Received: from aa-wap1.nexthop.com (HELO ?172.16.100.195?) (dang@fprintf.net@65.247.36.253) by nemesis.fprintf.net with SMTP; 28 Nov 2005 17:53:53 -0500 Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Moving GCC-3.4 to stable on x86 From: Daniel Gryniewicz To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <438B4877.2040808@gentoo.org> References: <20051128142233.GA19195@aerie.halcy0n.com> <438B4877.2040808@gentoo.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-IVGC+zXWrSFotD6ZnAV6" Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 17:24:52 -0500 Message-Id: <1133216692.22506.39.camel@athena.fprintf.net> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.1 X-Archives-Salt: 94d6d503-d8f3-4e84-b61f-5eebc5d075da X-Archives-Hash: 2db94b5e67379a2d77bda984db456bdb --=-IVGC+zXWrSFotD6ZnAV6 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 19:12 +0100, Bjarke Istrup Pedersen wrote: >=20 > Does this mean that we can get rid of the libstd++ dependency of gcc, > and move it to the binary packages that depends on gcc 3.3 . > I know this has been discussed before, but once it's stable I see no > reason to keep the dependency in the gcc ebuild, when it could be in the > binary packages. >=20 Well, right after the upgrade, there will still be tons of non-binary programs built against the old libstdc++, so no. Unless you want to force everyone to emerge -e world after the upgrade (which will make you very unpopular). Daniel --=-IVGC+zXWrSFotD6ZnAV6 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2-ecc0.1.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBDi4O0omPajV0RnrERAviKAKCA4RPKcsfwV48U9lUJmrgwblzwZwCggiJX W1ff0r3HKMl5x0svNnSG43w= =Mt41 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-IVGC+zXWrSFotD6ZnAV6-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list