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>