Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 17:23:55 +0200 From: Michael Nottebrock <michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> To: Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Quo vadis, -CURRENT? (recent changes to cc & compatibility) Message-ID: <3F5F420B.5030202@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: <20030910144620.GA2438@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> References: <3F5F2774.9010408@gmx.net> <20030910144620.GA2438@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Steve Kargl wrote: > I have no problems in building the traditional C "hello world" > program with "cc -pedantic". You're right about that, you'll need a C++ hello world (<iostream>, cout). This is in the archives anyway and (should be) well known. >>(why could >>this change not have been made _after_ 4.9 is out the door, btw.? Or before >>5.0-R FWIW.) > > > 4.9 and 5.0-R are independent branch. By your logic we should wait to > 4.10 or 4.11 or 4.12 or ... before any substantial change can be made > to -CURRENT. The point is that is isn't wise to commit a change like the -pthread deprecation that breaks many ports just before a ports-freeze. > The reason gcc-3.3.1 was committed before 5.0-R should > be fairly obvious. I was concerned with the -pthread deprecation. >>I feel that a FreeBSD that manages to break so many existing >>configure-scripts and build systems is degraded in usefulness. > > Please see the Handbook for the distinction between -CURRENT > and -STABLE. Oh please. -- ,_, | 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?3F5F420B.5030202>