Pierre Labastie wrote:
Shouldn't we add an entities &gcc6-tested, &gcc6-built and add those to
the package descriptions when tested?
That's a good idea. We did it with gcc5. I'm not sure though that we
need to differentiate between built and tested. I'm pretty confident that
gcc5_checked is enough.
<!ENTITY gcc6_built "<para>This package is known to build
properly using the gcc-5 compiler.</para>">
When we go through the next release cycle, that would be removed and we
check everything then anyway.
Speaking of the next release, I'm tempted to call it 8.0 using Linus'
rationale: it's just time for that. It's been 5 years since 7.0.
Thoughts?
-- Bruce
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
