Re: Transition news: GCC 6 enabled by default

2016-08-18 Thread Dirk Eddelbuettel
On 9 August 2016 at 17:44, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: | On 07/08/16 15:18, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > | > Thanks for starting the g++-6 transition. | > | > I suspect/believe that I "own" a (small) stack which needs a transition policy: | > | > -- the "R" language (source package r-base)

Re: Transition news: GCC 6 enabled by default

2016-08-09 Thread Dirk Eddelbuettel
On 9 August 2016 at 17:44, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: | On 07/08/16 15:18, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > | > Thanks for starting the g++-6 transition. | > | > I suspect/believe that I "own" a (small) stack which needs a transition policy: | > | > -- the "R" language (source package r-base)

Re: Transition news: GCC 6 enabled by default

2016-08-09 Thread Emilio Pozuelo Monfort
On 07/08/16 15:18, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: > > Thanks for starting the g++-6 transition. > > I suspect/believe that I "own" a (small) stack which needs a transition > policy: > > -- the "R" language (source package r-base) encodes its configuration time > choices for all subsequent

Re: Transition news: GCC 6 enabled by default

2016-08-07 Thread Paul Wise
On Sun, Aug 7, 2016 at 9:18 PM, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: > Let me know if I should take this to debian-devel or some other list. I'm not part of the release team, but I expect you probably should read the documentation and then file a bug report, the release team often emphasises bug reports

Re: Transition news: GCC 6 enabled by default

2016-08-07 Thread Dirk Eddelbuettel
Thanks for starting the g++-6 transition. I suspect/believe that I "own" a (small) stack which needs a transition policy: -- the "R" language (source package r-base) encodes its configuration time choices for all subsequent compilations; here we have CXX and CXX1X (plus CXX1Y in next