sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
- From: Flavien Bridault <f.bridault AT fra.net>
- To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] new glibc hits stable
- Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 07:57:44 +0100
Le Jeudi 24 Février 2005 19:23, Arwed von Merkatz a écrit :
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 07:16:18PM +0100, Flavien Bridault wrote:
> > > A warning to everyone on test grimoire who can't afford to recompile a
> > > lot of stuff right now: gcc 3.4 comes with yet another binary
> > > incompatible libstdc++, so all c++ programs have to be recompiled after
> > > it's updated. If you don't want to do all those recompiles now you
> > > should put gcc on hold.
> >
> > I think this would be good to prevent the user INSIDE the spell, maybe as
> > I did with udev. If someone didn't read your mail, cast gcc and then
> > reboot, he will have a completely broken system.
>
> Not completely broken, everything needed to boot is plain C or shell.
>
Well my box is still compiling... 12 hours now... All qt-related spells were
broken for instance... I don't have the exact number but dozens of spells are
broken (xorg for example...). But you're right, I could boot however... ;-)
So it seems you don't want to warn the user and anyway this is not the way it
should be done ihmo. WHY g++ didn't triggered a check_self() on all these
spells ?? I know this is not done in all c++ spells and that it would be a
hard work, but finally would'nt it be the real solution ? We do it for other
spells why not here ? Or did I forgot something ??
--
Flavien Bridault
Source Mage GNU/Linux - Disk Guru
IRC : vlaaad
Jabber : vlaaad AT amessage.be
http://www.sourcemage.org
Attachment:
pgpcgy1aAkxMY.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-
[SM-Discuss] new glibc hits stable,
Arwed von Merkatz, 02/24/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] new glibc hits stable,
Flavien Bridault, 02/24/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] new glibc hits stable,
Andrew, 02/24/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] new glibc hits stable,
Flavien Bridault, 02/24/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] new glibc hits stable,
Andrew, 02/24/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] new glibc hits stable, Flavien Bridault, 02/24/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] new glibc hits stable,
Andrew, 02/24/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] new glibc hits stable,
Flavien Bridault, 02/24/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] new glibc hits stable,
Arwed von Merkatz, 02/24/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] new glibc hits stable,
Flavien Bridault, 02/25/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] new glibc hits stable,
Eric Sandall, 02/25/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] new glibc hits stable,
Andrew, 02/25/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] new glibc hits stable,
Eric Sandall, 02/25/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] new glibc hits stable, Flavien Bridault, 02/26/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] new glibc hits stable,
Seth Alan Woolley, 02/25/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] new glibc hits stable, Andrew, 02/25/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] new glibc hits stable, Arwed von Merkatz, 02/26/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] new glibc hits stable, Eric Sandall, 02/26/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] new glibc hits stable,
Eric Sandall, 02/25/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] new glibc hits stable,
Andrew, 02/25/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] new glibc hits stable,
Eric Sandall, 02/25/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] new glibc hits stable,
Flavien Bridault, 02/25/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] new glibc hits stable,
Andrew, 02/24/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] new glibc hits stable,
Flavien Bridault, 02/24/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] new glibc hits stable, Arwed von Merkatz, 02/24/2005
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.