On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 11:08:45AM -0500, Douglas R. Reno wrote:
> On Jul 16, 2015 11:06 AM, "Ken Moffat" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 11:00:00AM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> > > Armin K. wrote:
> > >
> > > >>  GCC-5.2.0 has been released and is a bugfix update to the stable
> GCC-5
> > > >>  series.
> > >
> > > >Mainly for Bruce, but others are free to participate:
> > > >
> > > >Glibc-2.22 is planned for July 31st. I could handle both at that time
> if
> > > >you're not in a hurry and want to get this release in the book asap.
> > > >
> > > >But, given the past Glibc release history, it could easily slip up to
> > > >mid August.
> > >
> > > I'll go ahead and get it in the book sometime this weekend.  I'd like to
> > > have it tested a bit before glibc.  We will need to update BLFS for this
> > > too.
> > >
> > > I don't recall which packages needed workarounds for gcc-5.1, but there
> is a
> > > possibility that those workarounds are no longer necessary.
> > >
> > >   -- Bruce
> > >
> > In general, I think the main problem was extra output from the
> > preprocessor (e.g. the gnulib tests, and probably perl) and that was
> > apparently deliberate.
> >
> > ĸen
> > --
> If I recall correctly, the only package that had issues with build-wise
> with 5.1 was Ncurses-5.9. Other than that, I cannot recall anything else.
> 
> Douglas R. Reno

Looking at my scripts to see where gcc 5 was mentioned, there is
also one of the tests in glibc (I don't recall the issue), and
gst-plugins-bad which again was caused by the extra preprocessor
output.

ĸen
-- 
This one goes up to eleven!
-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Reply via email to