On 28/06/17 11:59, Maris Nartiss wrote:
Of course we can release 7.0.6., still I wouldn't expect any distro
already shipping 7.0 to "upgrade" GCC to 7 without upgrading the rest
of packages, as GCC 7 would break not only GRASS GIS.
At the end it is call for the release manager (Markus?) to decide if
he's into packaging et al.
I would say that we leave it to distro maintainers to apply the existing
patch if they really need it.
Moritz
Māris.
2017-06-27 12:49 GMT+03:00 Markus Neteler <[email protected]>:
On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 3:54 PM, Moritz Lennert
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 26/06/17 15:42, Markus Neteler wrote:
On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 2:49 PM, Markus Metz
On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 11:39 PM, Markus Neteler <[email protected]>
...
That means, some distros would update GRASS from 7.0.5 to 7.0.6 but not
to 7.2.2? Weird.
AFAIK their rationale is to introduce major updates only within a full
distro release cycle.
However, I am just guessing here, extrapolating from what I observed
in Fedora and Debian.
In Debian, it's mostly a question of timing between Debian freeze for a new
release and our releases. The new stable was released a week ago with
7.2.0-2, and Debian testing has 7.2.1-1.
FWIW, I got 7.2.1 into Fedora yesterday via maintainer Devrim Gündüz
(my updated SPEC file + ctypes patch):
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=1972
:-)
Ok, back to the topic:
If the majority of grass-devs thinks that a 7.0.6 release is not
needed, I'm ok with that. Maintainers just need to understand that the
final patch from #3331 is needed to compile with GCC 7.
markusN
_______________________________________________
grass-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev
_______________________________________________
grass-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev
