Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 12:47:37 +0100 From: Alexander Langer <alex@big.endian.de> To: Michael VanLoon <MichaelV@EDIFECS.COM> Cc: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.ORG>, ports@FreeBSD.ORG, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 4.0-release (ports) schedule Message-ID: <20000125124737.A3842@cichlids.cichlids.com> In-Reply-To: <8070C3A4E99ED211A63200105A19B99B3174DA@mail.edifecs.com>; from MichaelV@EDIFECS.COM on Mon, Jan 24, 2000 at 12:11:09PM -0800 References: <8070C3A4E99ED211A63200105A19B99B3174DA@mail.edifecs.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Thus spake Michael VanLoon (MichaelV@EDIFECS.COM): > What would you do about it? The C++ standard says that's an error. So, > it's an error. It's not "too strict" -- it's exactly the right amount of > strictness to conform to the standard. Yes. That's what I meant with "Somehow, it's very good ...". BUT: Other compilers don't treat this as an error, that's why many ports fail. Ok, so far it's just the porter's thing to make stuff compile. Alex -- I doubt, therefore I might be. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000125124737.A3842>