This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Error report (gcc 3.1)
On Thu, May 16, 2002 at 10:59:09PM +0200, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> I'm not sure that entry should name any particular file. Other files
> may be affected in the future.
For after-the-fact situations like this one, I've been mentioning the
files that users are likely to feed to a search engine.
> A safer way to deal with this issue is
> to version the header files installation. That is, instead of
> installing in
> we should be installing in
I agree wholeheartedly with the idea, but for the implementation, wouldn't
it be easier to just make --enable-version-specific-runtime-libs the default?
Then the headers all go under the versioned tree anyhow.
If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater
than the animating contest for freedom, go home and leave us in peace. We seek
not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you;
and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen. - Samuel Adams