More mass rebuilds for GCC

Peter Robinson pbrobinson at gmail.com
Tue Jan 10 15:59:34 UTC 2006


> > > > As you'll notice, there will be lots more packages bumped for the rebase
> > > > to gcc.  Most completed today, but we'll be working through a list of
> > > > failures over the next couple days.  Things will still be in a bit of
> > > > flux, but we're working on it.
> > > >
> > > > Java is still being worked on too.  Getting the java stack built with
> > > > gcj is a great accomplishment and I really respect our java and gcj team
> > > > for putting in the work to further the free java.  Please bare with us
> > > > as we finalize the development changes necessary to accomplish this
> > > > task.
> > >
> > > Does the new GCC introduce any run-time/ABI breakage which requires
> > > packages in Fedora Extras Development to be rebuilt? Or does it only
> > > reveal problematic source code?
> >
> > I think all the extras need to be rebuilt for this. I know seahorse
> > for one needs it (and may need some fixes).
>
> AFAIK, seahorse was affected by SONAME changes in some of its
> dependencies, which made a rebuild necessary. That was a change not
> related to the GCC upgrade. My question is not about ordinary breakage
> through upgrades of dependencies.

Yes, I think that's true but I also think there is some gcc41 rebuild
issues with it too (well there seems to be when I just try to rebuild
the srpm. I think the binaries produced by gcc 4 and 4.1 are
compatible so most things won't need to be rebuilt, but then its
probably good for them to be rebuilt too.

Pete




More information about the devel mailing list