On 28.02.2011 12:49, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > Matthias Klose <[email protected]> (28/02/2011): >> wasn't built before. > > strictly speaking, yes. But since we're talking about a gcc package, > that *could* be considered as a regression from previous versions… But > what a hairy reasoning!
maybe, but then, it's an indication that the port is not maintained. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
