Summary: | Packages left : not compiling with gcc 4.3.1 | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Manfred Knick <Manfred.Knick> |
Component: | [OLD] GCC Porting | Assignee: | Gentoo Linux bug wranglers <bug-wranglers> |
Status: | RESOLVED CANTFIX | ||
Severity: | normal | ||
Priority: | High | ||
Version: | 2007.0 | ||
Hardware: | AMD64 | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
Bug Depends on: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 264505 |
Description
Manfred Knick
2008-06-24 15:58:30 UTC
GCC 4.3.1 will remain in testing for quite a long while. That stable keywordes ebuilds keyworded may not build is the normal case, reporting so is superfluous. Relevant are only package:slot combinations with the most recent ebuild not building with GCC 3.4.1 and for those file one bug for each case, please, assumed such a report doesn't exist yet. Your help is appreciated, but we cannot work with such a bug report. (In reply to comment #1) > ... superfluous. As well as your "briefing" ... I personally was _very_ happy and impressed about the result: " only 7 out of ~ 1300 ". And in my projects, I personally would defenitely not reject such an overall experience / actual status result as of no value at all. The first part was meant as an honest big compliment for a superb result; I'm sorry if you are not prepared to share it like that ... > ... package:slot combinations with the most recent ebuild > not building with GCC 3.4.1 ... Exactly that is my latter list: "Only the following..." > assumed such a report doesn't exist yet. I had defenitely checked that before. And, btw, what is unclear about "due to strictness checking" ? > Your help is appreciated, Really? > but we cannot work with such a bug report. Unfortunate. (In reply to comment #2) > > ... package:slot combinations with the most recent ebuild > > not building with GCC 3.4.1 ... > > Exactly that is my latter list: "Only the following..." As I explained such a list is not suited as we cannot assign a single bug holding a list of issues affecting different packages and their respective maintainers to a single alias. This is why you're asked to file one bug for each of these packages and not dump a list in one bug. > Really? Really. ADDENDUM to comment #2 : Please, c.f. http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=229255 http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=229261 http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=229263 http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=229267 http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=229269 http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=229271 http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=229273 Hope it helps. Kind regards Manfred Seems like a crossover / overlap on the time bar ... ;) |