make unmaintained ??
ngompa13 at gmail.com
Mon Oct 26 16:42:12 UTC 2015
On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 12:21 PM, drago01 <drago01 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 8:24 PM, Stephen John Smoogen <smooge at gmail.com>
> > On Oct 25, 2015 12:53, "Jan Kratochvil" <jan.kratochvil at redhat.com>
> >> On Sun, 25 Oct 2015 01:07:47 +0200, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> >> > I built 4.1 for rawhide. If that checks out to be OK, I can push
> >> > an update for F23 also.
> >> I do not understand why a major rebase could be permitted after all the
> >> F-23
> >> freezing stages? It may cause FTBFSes or even broken builds. What is
> >> then
> >> all the release engineering good for? Why not to just run Rawhide then?
> > I have to agree. I have been bitten too many times by minor tweaks
> > builds in the OS. However the rules where a completely frozen build
> > was causing problems in the past so I am expecting make is considered
> > important than gcc?
> We have been shipping gcc bugfix updates all the time ... there is no
> reason why we shouldn't do the same for make.
And unlike major gcc bumps, make bumps don't require mass rebuilds, since
it's just a user tool and things don't link to it.
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the devel