On 4/9/06, Bruce Dubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dan Nicholson wrote: > > > > I just want to state for the record that I think that lumping > > glibc-2.4 in just because we're trying to make a release is a bad > > idea. Glibc affects practically (probably) every single package in > > the system. This is not on the same scale as removing hotplug. > > How long do you think does it needs to be tested?
I wish I new, Bruce, but I haven't used glibc-2.4 at all, and I'm not the expert there. If both glibc-2.4 and gcc-4.1.0 went in to SVN, I'd like to see both there at least a month or two before going into release testing. And that month or two depends on whether there are at least a couple of experienced users really putting their systems to the test. Really, though, I'd like to hear what Ryan Oliver has to say. I know he doesn't build the native toolchain anymore, but he knows gcc/glibc better than all of us in this thread combined. Same with Greg Schafer, and that carries the added bonus that he has actually built and tested a native toolchain using glibc-2.4/gcc-4.1.0. Some people don't like to hear his opinion, but he and Ryan can do more than speculate on this topic. -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
