On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 01:47:26PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 06:31:01PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > >> Roger Leigh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> > >> > Some of the ARM buildds are still not using G++ 4.1 as the default C++ > >> > compiler, nearly two months after the default was changed. I already > >> > reported this over a month ago to [EMAIL PROTECTED], but it's > >> > still unfixed. That is the correct address, isn't it? > >> > > >> > Please could all the ARM buildds be updated to use the current > >> > toolchain? > >> > >> Shouldn't sbuild automatically install the latest build-essentials by > sorry, typo: build-essential > >> itself? > > > > No; updating the chroot is the buildd maintainer's job. > > > > This is a good thing; there've been cases where I manually downgraded > > specific toolchain packages because of bugs like #327780, and I wouldn't > > want sbuild to go ahead and upgrade things like that without my explicit > > instruction. > > > > (Of course, that's ignoring the fact that sometimes build-dependencies > > pull in new versions of those libraries. Whatever) > > I'm not proposing sbuild should upgrade the chroot fully every time. Just > the build-essential package. Having an arch build with a completly > different gcc when all of debian has switched is, well, stupid.
True. > Build-essential has e.g. > > Depends: libc6-dev | libc-dev, gcc (>= 4:4.1.1), g++ (>= 4:4.1.1), make, > dpkg-dev (>= 1.13.5) > > That ensures some minimum versions of the tool-chain but not the > specific versions. If an release arch has no suitable version within > those constrains then there is something seriously wrong. Right. I guess a patch would be welcome ;-) -- Fun will now commence -- Seven Of Nine, "Ashes to Ashes", stardate 53679.4 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
