sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
Re: [SM-Discuss] Lets merge some newer GCC into master
- From: David Kowis <dkowis AT shlrm.org>
- To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] Lets merge some newer GCC into master
- Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2014 14:36:22 -0600
On 11/24/2014 02:09 PM, Ismael Luceno wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Nov 2014 14:36:19 -0500
> Sukneet Basuta <sukneet AT gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 12:48 PM, Ismael Luceno
>> <ismael.luceno AT gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Some packages now require a newer GCC to build, we've got at least
>>> Webkit 2, which requires GCC 4.7+.
>>>
>>> I think it's time we merge at least 4.8 into master.
>>>
>>> So far nothing broke on my systems with gcc 4.8.3, and we're way
>>> behind most distributions in this matter.
>>>
>>> Anyone against doing this?
>>>
>>
>> I'm not necessarily against it, but the reason why we are still on
>> gcc 4.6 is because nvidia_driver has an issue with the version of
>> xorg in test when compiled with gcc 4.7. Merging devel_xorg_modular
>> would solve the issue. http://www.sourcemage.org/issues/376
>
> Though I would love to see xorg-devel merged to test at some point too,
> it's not a priority for me right now, and I don't feel particularly
> worried about breaking spells in z-rejected, even if the bug is in
> xorg-server, as long as it doesn't break any driver in test I'm fine
> with it...
Just my humble opinion, if I still used smgl on my desktop, that'd be a
deal breaker for me. Arguably the nvidia_driver is very commonly used,
and actually a reasonably well built driver.
I'd rather see the xorg-devel merged in also, otherwise we're just going
to build a larger gap, imho.
>
> BTW, does it break nouveau?
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> SM-Discuss mailing list
> SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss
>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-
[SM-Discuss] Lets merge some newer GCC into master,
Ismael Luceno, 11/24/2014
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Lets merge some newer GCC into master,
Sukneet Basuta, 11/24/2014
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Lets merge some newer GCC into master,
Ismael Luceno, 11/24/2014
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Lets merge some newer GCC into master,
David Kowis, 11/24/2014
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Lets merge some newer GCC into master,
Ismael Luceno, 11/24/2014
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Lets merge some newer GCC into master, Thomas Orgis, 11/25/2014
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Lets merge some newer GCC into master,
Ismael Luceno, 11/24/2014
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Lets merge some newer GCC into master,
Sukneet Basuta, 11/24/2014
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Lets merge some newer GCC into master,
Ismael Luceno, 11/24/2014
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Lets merge some newer GCC into master,
Ladislav Hagara, 11/24/2014
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Lets merge some newer GCC into master, Ismael Luceno, 11/24/2014
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Lets merge some newer GCC into master,
Ladislav Hagara, 11/24/2014
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Lets merge some newer GCC into master,
Ismael Luceno, 11/24/2014
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Lets merge some newer GCC into master,
David Kowis, 11/24/2014
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Lets merge some newer GCC into master,
Ismael Luceno, 11/24/2014
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Lets merge some newer GCC into master,
Sukneet Basuta, 11/24/2014
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.