lfs-3.0-pre3

Marc Heerdink marc_heerdink at softhome.net
Sat May 5 02:11:43 PDT 2001


Gerard Beekmans sent these bits on Fri, 4 May 2001 16:29:04 -0400:
> After pre3, I want to put gcc-2.95.3 in the book, and perhaps
> glibc-2.2.3. It's about time we start undergoing some real-life tests
> with gcc-2.95.3. I haven't heard that many bad things anymore, so we'll
> try it out.

I guess I've done enough rl tests.. I'm using gcc 2.95.3 since it was released
(together with glibc 2.2.2) and I really found no differences between compiling
with 2.95.2.1 and 2.95.3. But gcc 2.95.3 and glibc 2.2.2 (sadly, not 2.2.3)
belong together, so these should go in together. I still find it strange that
GNU did the header cleanups in a minor version (2.2.1->2.2.2)...

> Objections against the schedule?

OK for me.. but erhm is it really worth it to make pre3 now? AFAIK only a few
pages have changed (~10 or so) and some packages were upgraded. The editors will
be bothered with one more codefreeze, only 30 after the previous. That gives an
average of 10/40 days codefreeze, that is one out of four days that we can't
commit anything. I'm not planning to find anything big that should be changed,
but in this way development is slowed down. Let's say we find out how branches
work and start a pre3 branch for Gerard? :)

-- 
There is no programming language, no matter how structured,
that will prevent programmers from writing bad programs.
- L. Flon

Marc Heerdink
marc_heerdink at softhome.net
http://www.koelkast.net/





More information about the lfs-book mailing list