On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 09:08:15AM +0200, Harald Nordg?rd-Hansen wrote: > Ben Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Not a bug. Current gcc-3.2/gcc-3.3 on sparc is geared toward a default > > v8 hwmul target (e.g. real sun4m's and up). The reason being that the > > old v7/v8softmul was bringing performance down noticably (and I mean > > visually being able to measure small task differences). > > > > I announced probably 6 months or more ago that this would happen, so it > > should be no surprise. > > I would suggest that this is flagged in the packages as well, as a > user I'm sorry, but I just don't follow the sparc lists. > > > sun4c and sun4m-softmul owners should stick with woody. > > Why? A simple thing like flagging in gcc and(/or?) libc6 on upgrade > that they now require kernel 2.4.21 or newer on some machines would be > sufficient. But when doing a simple upgrade of a box and suddenly > binaries start failing all over the place is certainly what I would > call a bug. > > There are some of us out here that are just users of a platform. > Please, when doing this sort of changes do flag them in at least the > basic packages.
It will be in the release notes. -- Debian - http://www.debian.org/ Linux 1394 - http://www.linux1394.org/ Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/ WatchGuard - http://www.watchguard.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
