I still care about deploying darcs to platforms (Ubuntu Dapper) which
don't come with a new GHC.
However, deploying darcs to those platforms is probably better
accomplished by producing executables than by making it possible for
users to build darcs themselves using their prepackaged GHC, so
Hi Zooko,
David said:
> A good start would be to contact the folks running the ghc 6.4
> buildbots, to see if they care about those machines, or if they just
> installed an old version of ghc to broaden our test base.
You happen to own the buildbot slave with ghc 6.4.1.
Do you still care if dar
On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 6:56 AM, Eric Kow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I'd not oppose this if we can get a clear picture that noone is any
>> longer running ghc 6.4. If they are, then it seems worth allowing
>> them to continue using updated versions of darcs. The trouble, of
>> course, is that
> I'd not oppose this if we can get a clear picture that noone is any
> longer running ghc 6.4. If they are, then it seems worth allowing
> them to continue using updated versions of darcs. The trouble, of
> course, is that it's very, very hard to know what compiler folks are
> using. Maybe
On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 2:03 PM, Eric Kow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 09:43:16 -0700, Jason Dagit wrote:
>> Are we still actively supporting 6.4? Haven't the major linux
>> distributions moved on to 6.6 now? It looks like 6.6 was released a
>> full 2 years ago
+1.
___
darcs-users mailing list
darcs-users@darcs.net
http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
Hi all,
On Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 09:43:16 -0700, Jason Dagit wrote:
> Are we still actively supporting 6.4? Haven't the major linux
> distributions moved on to 6.6 now? It looks like 6.6 was released a
> full 2 years ago (the last release of the 6.4 series was in oct of
> 2006). Also, unless som
