On 01/05/2012 11:55 PM, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 22:38 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
They do not mean the resulting packages are more or less broken than
those having been built by predecessors of the toolchains.
Neither does an "ordered rebuild". Even assuming the concept of
ordering was any more well defined than tsort.
In general, I agree. But ... if there are changes in central places
which are explictily or implicitly introducing API/API changes, you
won't get far without an "ordered rebuild".
That said, in case of a "dot null" GCC release like this, hidden ABI/API
issues and "miscompiled" packages are likely to occur.
E.g. in this particular GCC release, the changes to g++/libstdc++ it
comes along with, are not unlikely to trigger chains of API/ABI changes
cause by "fixing c++" packages (== silent/hidden API/ABI changes inside
of these packages).
Ralf
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
