On 06/08/2012 04:42 PM, Gaetan Bisson wrote: > [2012-06-08 14:14:18 +0300] Ionut Biru: >> On 06/08/2012 01:47 PM, Andreas Radke wrote: >>> I've seen the commit msg that FF would require it. We have a rule to >>> ask on our dev ML to ask for pkg additions. Here you would probably >>> have received a -1 because FF must be broken if it would not >>> compile/run with our recent gcc. >> >> I prefer to have a good working webgl backend in our firefox. >> I found it funny that you opened this discussion since you are the one >> that reported the bug. > > It's polite to give people a heads up. > > Regardless, why do we need gcc4.6 in [extra] if it's only a makedepends > of one package, and -I believe- a temporary one at that? > > Cheers. >
I do agree that it was nice to have a heads up. I hope that is a temporally fix. Jan is tracking this bug since I do not want to deal yet with another gcc bug and upstream blaming each other without any concrete solution. -- Ionuț
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
