On 04/26/2011 09:28 PM, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 08:51:04PM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 05:03:01PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
I'll make GCC 4.6 the
default after the release of GCC 4.5.3, expected later this week, at
least on amd64, armel, i386 and p
Kurt Roeckx, le Tue 26 Apr 2011 21:28:57 +0200, a écrit :
> Is there a reason not to switch the remaining (release) arches
> (ia64, kfreebsd-*, sparc, s390)? Maybe hurd-i386 too?
There's no real reason to defer hurd-i386, as it's basically like i386,
and the key packages (glibc/hurd/gnumach) alre
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 08:51:04PM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 05:03:01PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > I'll make GCC 4.6 the
> > default after the release of GCC 4.5.3, expected later this week, at
> > least on amd64, armel, i386 and powerpc.
>
> If you do the switch
Matthias Klose dixit:
> At this point, pretty well after the GCC 4.6.0 release, I would like to avoid
> switching more architectures to 4.5, but rather get rid of GCC 4.5 to reduce
> maintenance efforts on the debian-gcc side, even before the multiarch changes
Porters side, too. I’m okay with kee
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 05:03:01PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 04/17/2011 09:33 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> >On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 02:34 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> >>I'll make gcc-4.5 the default for (at least some) architectures within the
> >>next
> >>two weeks before more transitions
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Konstantinos Margaritis
wrote:
> On 26 April 2011 18:03, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> I'll make GCC 4.6 the default after the release of
>> GCC 4.5.3, expected later this week, at least on amd64, armel, i386 and
>> powerpc.
>
> Could you include armhf in the list as w
On 04/26/2011 05:31 PM, Konstantinos Margaritis wrote:
On 26 April 2011 18:03, Matthias Klose wrote:
I'll make GCC 4.6 the default after the release of
GCC 4.5.3, expected later this week, at least on amd64, armel, i386 and
powerpc.
Could you include armhf in the list as well?
yes, forgot a
On 26 April 2011 18:03, Matthias Klose wrote:
> I'll make GCC 4.6 the default after the release of
> GCC 4.5.3, expected later this week, at least on amd64, armel, i386 and
> powerpc.
Could you include armhf in the list as well?
Thanks
Konstantinos
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-powerpc-
On 04/17/2011 09:33 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 02:34 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
I'll make gcc-4.5 the default for (at least some) architectures within the next
two weeks before more transitions start. GCC-4.5 is already used as the default
compiler for almost any other d
On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 02:34 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> I'll make gcc-4.5 the default for (at least some) architectures within the
> next
> two weeks before more transitions start. GCC-4.5 is already used as the
> default
> compiler for almost any other distribution, so there shouldn't be man
> On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 8:34 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > I'll make gcc-4.5 the default for (at least some) architectures within th=
> e next
> > two weeks before more transitions start. =A0GCC-4.5 is already used as th=
> e default
> > compiler for almost any other distribution, so there should
On Wed, 02 Mar 2011 02:34:01 +0100
Matthias Klose wrote:
> I'll make gcc-4.5 the default for (at least some) architectures
> within the next two weeks before more transitions start. GCC-4.5 is
> already used as the default compiler for almost any other
> distribution, so there shouldn't be many
On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 8:34 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
> I'll make gcc-4.5 the default for (at least some) architectures within the
> next
> two weeks before more transitions start. GCC-4.5 is already used as the
> default
> compiler for almost any other distribution, so there shouldn't be many
On 02.03.2011 17:54, Martin Guy wrote:
> On 2 March 2011 02:34, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> armel (although optimized for a different processor)
>
> Hi
> For which processor (/architecture) is it optimized, and do you mean
> optimized-for, or only-runs-on?
> I ask in case this would mean dumping
On 2 March 2011 02:34, Matthias Klose wrote:
> armel (although optimized for a different processor)
Hi
For which processor (/architecture) is it optimized, and do you mean
optimized-for, or only-runs-on?
I ask in case this would mean dumping all the armv4t systems that are
using Debian armel.
On 02.03.2011 07:36, Konstantinos Margaritis wrote:
> On 2 March 2011 03:34, Matthias Klose wrote:
>
>> I'll make gcc-4.5 the default for (at least some) architectures within the
>> next
>> two weeks before more transitions start. GCC-4.5 is already used as the
>> default
>> compiler for almost
On 2 March 2011 03:34, Matthias Klose wrote:
> I'll make gcc-4.5 the default for (at least some) architectures within the
> next
> two weeks before more transitions start. GCC-4.5 is already used as the
> default
> compiler for almost any other distribution, so there shouldn't be many
> surprise
I'll make gcc-4.5 the default for (at least some) architectures within the next
two weeks before more transitions start. GCC-4.5 is already used as the default
compiler for almost any other distribution, so there shouldn't be many surprises
on at least the common architectures. About 50% of the b
18 matches
Mail list logo
