Re: the solicitation of opinions

"Tom 'spot' Callaway" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.linux.aurora.devel
Organization Red Hat
Message-ID <1051543507.3696.67.camel@zorak>
On Mon, 2003-04-28 at 10:10, Christian Joensson wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 28, 2003 at 10:00:46AM -0500, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote:
>  
> > Since I'm working through the build process for the next Aurora build
> > (RHL 9 based), now is your time to suggest packages to be added to the
> > Aurora build that are not found in Red Hat Linux 9.
> 
> well, I'd sure put a vote for gcc-3.2.3 instead of gcc-3.2.2...
> 
> See http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-3.2/changes.html for a list of changes and
> bugs fixed vs. 3.2.2... specifically the SPARC related ones...
> 
> And maybe, just maybe, I'd vote for a more recent binutils if
> H.J. comes out with something... There's been a few things happening
> just lately with binutils for SPARC, but I'd wait for a release from
> H.J... The cvs sources just branched off a 2.13 branch and the
> development trunk is bumped up to 2.14.90 just yesterday...

gcc 3.2.3: looks like a bugfix release (even though none of the bugs
seem to be sparc-linux specific). I'll see if we can safely sneak this
in.

binutils: I dunno. I'm reluctant to go beyond where we are now
(binutils-2.13.90.0.20-5) without good reason.

> But then again, I'd strongly think twice about forking off too far
> away from RHL 9 apart from the kernel... Your call spot :-)

Yep. But so far, all good suggestions.

~spot
---
Tom "spot" Callaway <tcallawa(a)redhat*com> SAIR LCA, RHCE
Red Hat Enterprise Architect :: http://www.redhat.com
Project Leader for Aurora Sparc Linux :: http://auroralinux.org
GPG: D786 8B22 D9DB 1F8B 4AB7  448E 3C5E 99AD 9305 4260

The words and opinions reflected in this message do not necessarily
reflect those of my employer, Red Hat, and belong solely to me.

"Immature poets borrow, mature poets steal." --- T. S. Eliot
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.