Am Montag, 13. Juni 2016 um 22:15:02, schrieb Guillaume Munch <[email protected]>
> Le 13/06/2016 21:54, Pavel Sanda a écrit :
> > Guillaume Munch wrote:
> >> Starting from 2.3, LyX will require a C++11 compiler, and g++ 4.6 fails
> >> (it seems) at a feature as elementary as generating a default move
> >> constructor, even when told so explicitly (which we cannot really blame
> >> it for, given that it does not claim C++11 compliance in the first
> >> place). Moreover, the only distribution release that is currently stuck
> >> with g++ 4.6 is (to my knowledge) Ubuntu 12.04LTS, which will no longer
> >> be around by the time 2.3 ships (unless a miracle happens), and which
> >> offers another compiler more respectful of C++11. On the other hand,
> >> what reasons do we have for supporting g++ 4.6?
> >>
> >> If you really need a temporary workaround until you get to migrate your
> >> work environment, (and you do not want to/can use clang,) you could keep
> >> a local series of fixes. I imagine that for your current sort of problem
> >> (as far as I understand, because I do not have access to g++ 4.6 to test
> >> my theory), you just need manual definitions of move constructors and
> >> assignment operators. For e87febd0 in particular, however, it is easier,
> >> because it should be safe to just revert it locally, given that this is
> >> an isolated change.
> >
> > Thanks for summarizing.
> > I can confirm that reverting e87febd0 makes master compilable again with 
> > 4.6.
> >
> > I am not in charge for the machines around me and given 12.04 LTS ends up
> > 2017-04 I don't expect any migration happening soon :)
> >
> > So I guess the bad news is I can't quickly bisect what's going on 32 cores
> > anymore, the good news is I'll get more real work done :)
> >
> 
> Thank you Pavel for your understanding. I hope the inconvenience is
> temporary.
> 
> So is there a consensus that g++ 4.8 is a reasonable minimum version to
> support?
> 

I'd like Pavel be able to compile too.

        Kornel

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Reply via email to