On Friday 22 June 2001 06:08, Chris Waters wrote: > On Fri, Jun 22, 2001 at 01:32:56AM -0400, Warren Turkal wrote: > > Severity: normal > > Policy proposals should be made with severity wishlist.
Sorry about that. > > I read your entire rant, and I still have no idea what you were > trying to propose. We already recommend using alternatives when > possible, and dpkg-divert only when absolutely necessary. We're NOT > going to make the alternatives system mandatory -- we trust the > judgement of our maintainers. > I think that anything that provides a common functionality as something else should use the alternative system, especially when it claims to provide the same thing (namely c-compiler). The folks on debian-security have been discussing this same thing about the pgp and gpg packages. > If you have a problem with how the gcc packages are set up, I suggest > you file a wishlist bug against the gcc packages. I don't think > we're going to change it -- I think it's the way it is for good > reason. But I'll leave that up to the judgement of the gcc > maintainers. > Will do. :) > This applies to any sorts of packages where the alternatives system > isn't in use but could be. You can file wishlist bugs. If the > maintainers agree, then you get your wish, and otherwise, well, > you've got the source... :-) > Where can I find info on building the software with apt? > As an aside, I'll point out the handy environment variable CC, which > you can set to whatever your little heart might desire. That should > more than solve your immediate complaint. > I know about that. It just seems like this should be fixed in /etc. > cheers
