Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 01:52:55 +0200 From: Michael Nottebrock <michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> To: deischen@freebsd.org Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Quo vadis, -CURRENT? (recent changes to cc & compatibility) Message-ID: <3F5FB957.7040407@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10309101550160.15329-100000@pcnet5.pcnet.com> References: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10309101550160.15329-100000@pcnet5.pcnet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Daniel Eischen wrote:
>>I feel that a FreeBSD that manages to break so many existing configure-scripts
>>and build systems is degraded in usefulness.
>
> Please, this is -current. If you want less pain then stick
> with -stable and you won't be annoyed by the -pthread removal.
Perhaps I should make it clear that, personally, I'm NOT very much annoyed. I
know my way around in ports@, I actually do know what -CURRENT means and I
have no problem with using the ports-collection exclusively instead of quickly
compiling my own stuff right there in my user-account.
The problem is just that this -CURRENT is supposed to be -STABLE rather soon,
as we all know (I think the RE status for HEAD is 'Semi-Frozen', too). There
are many users out there with 5.1-Release installed which have at best only a
very distant clue about the fact they're running an "early adopter's release"
and they won't be upgrading to 4.9-R or 4.10-R when the time arrives.
For someone coming from 5.0-R or 5.1-R, the new "necessary evil behaviour" of
cc/c++, be it -pedantic or -pthread, will be totally unexpected.
--
,_, | Michael Nottebrock | lofi@freebsd.org
(/^ ^\) | FreeBSD - The Power to Serve | http://www.freebsd.org
\u/ | K Desktop Environment on FreeBSD | http://freebsd.kde.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3F5FB957.7040407>