Greetings, I was looking through debian-gcc and debian-java for threads on gcc-3.4 inclusion in sarge, and came across "gcc-3.4 to [sic] unstable for amd64" with a post from jgoerzen:
--- > 2. will gcc-3.4 be included in sarge? Highly doubtful. > 3. is pure64 going to be included in sarge? No. > gcc-3.4 will become default after the release, why should we not already > build everything with gcc-3.4, since it produces faster code? I'm not sure that performance is itself a good enough rationale to justify breaking from all the other archs in sid. --- I agree that it's wise to be conservative with regard to amd64, and we certainly don't want to break anything by changing the default compiler. And performance is indeed a weak justification for such a major infrastructure change. But why not put 3.4 in along with 3.3, the way 3.0 was in woody, such that certain packages have the option of using 3.4? Is 3.4 really so unstable that it must be excluded from sarge? In terms of motivations, my primary one is Java, where including 3.4 would allow a large number of packages (possibly including my own babel, depending on its dependencies) to move to main and run on many more architectures. [Please CC me as I'm not subscribed.] Thanks, -Adam P. GPG fingerprint: D54D 1AEE B11C CE9B A02B C5DD 526F 01E8 564E E4B6 Welcome to the best software in the world today cafe! http://lyre.mit.edu/~powell/The_Best_Stuff_In_The_World_Today_Cafe.ogg
