> On 06/04/2010 03:28 AM, Ike Devolder wrote: > > in some recent updates of some packages you see more and more deb's or rpms > > or whatever being extracted and repacked for arch > > > > is there some aur guideline about this, i really don't like this development > > because why not take advantage of our bleeding edge gcc power > > > > if the source is there, why not build from it? > > > > in cases like opera it is understandable because it is not open source, but > > in some other cases like kalsamix i find it very disturbing > > > > maybe some other comments about this ? > > Excerpts from Nathan O.'s message of 2010-06-04 10:29:56 +0200: > First I just wanted to clear this, I would normally build from source, > but if it doesn't work I will attempt at a deb package, but even that > doesn't work > What about using debian patches? I don't know why they aren't upstream in the first place, but...
At the moment I kind of understand it that alternatives to compiling are sought. gcc4.5.0 seems to not only introduce new warnings and errors but also bugs. I helped yesterday to hopefully nail a bad optimisation related one. Some call it insane to build a distro on a *.0 gcc. -- Regards, Philipp -- "Wir stehen selbst enttäuscht und sehn betroffen / Den Vorhang zu und alle Fragen offen." Bertolt Brecht, Der gute Mensch von Sezuan
