On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 11:24:31PM +0000, Stephen Bennett wrote: > On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 23:36:33 +0100 > Rémi Cardona <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Newbie idea : g++ and boost both provide virtual/tr1 > > > > Newbie question : besides the fact that you would have to rebuild > > packages if you changed the virtual, is there anything painfully > > obvious why that would be a bad idea ? > > And what exactly is required of a package providing virtual/tr1? If it > has to implement the entirity of the TR, then g++-4.1 can't provide the > virtual and the purpose is lost since the most used parts of the > extension will be those provided by GCC.
You're ignoring that new style virtuals can have versions; thus virtual/tr-[arbitrary version <1] can be 'almost full 1 support'. Yes, mildly hackish, but it address that concern. As for "whatever I build against, I hard RDEP on", as said elsewhere, need a way to specify that an rdep is 'binding', non changable. ~harring
pgpPz9cjol1cf.pgp
Description: PGP signature
