Andy Wingo <wi...@pobox.com> writes:
> On Sun 13 Feb 2011 10:58, Neil Jerram <n...@ossau.uklinux.net> writes:
>
>> No. But that might be because the libgc on that machine - Debian
>> 1:7.1-3 - is too old. What is the latest recommendation for libgc
>> version? README says "at least version 7.0", but I suspect that's out
>> of date.
>
> I think we are a little incoherent on that point, given that 6.8 works,
> and there is no 7.2 release. Also, while there are bugs like
> https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?32436 that persist with CVS libgc, it's
> tough to say. I wonder actually if this bug is related to that one.
>
> Andy
So I'd guess this problem, and more generally the question of which
libgc version is best, is something we can live with for 2.0 - until
more data points emerge. Right?
Neil
