On 7/9/06, Molle Bestefich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Try reading the bug - users are basically being shoved off with an arrogant silence and a stamp on their forehead saying INVALID.
*Sigh*. You really should post to -user first. The expectation here is that when a new version of gcc is stabilized, that users will upgrade to that in a reasonable amount of time, and use that (by selecting it with gcc-config) for compiling all new updates. FYI, gcc-3.4.4-r1 was stabilized on 2-Dec-2005, and the current stable is 3.4.6-r1 since May 29th. The devs can *not* be expected to verify that all software in portage builds with all versions of gcc in portage. For example, there is still an ebuild for gcc-2.95.3! But that is _not_ to be used for compiling new updates. The alternative here is that old versions of gcc disappear from portage, but that causes a problem for those who need those versions for some reason, such as compiling non-gentoo software.
Nothing personal against Jakub Moc who probably has a lot to do, but the handling of relevant issues raised in the bugzilla is just unacceptable.
What, exactly, do you find unacceptable in "Your gcc version is outdated and unsupported"? I suppose portage could be enhanced to have a is_gcc_version_supported() check, but I'm not sure how useful that would be.
What's the state of Portage and Gentoo in general? Is there not enough hands to do a proper job? Or is it just that none of the devs see what's wrong because bugs are wrongly being closed marked "INVALID" such as the above when they're in fact not?
If you want to test compiling every version of every package in portage with all 21 versions (16 if you assume all -rX versions are compatible, or /only 9/ if you only consider stable x86 versions) of gcc that are currently in portage, and submit patches when things fail, go ahead. BTW, your patches cannot remove the ability to use improvements that are only available in newer stable versions of gcc, such as -fvisibility=hidden. -Richard -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
