On Fri, 2007-09-14 at 17:21 -0500, Aaron Griffin wrote:
On 9/14/07, Tobias Powalowski <t.powa@gmx.de> wrote:
- gcc splitup is pending
JGC, do you know how long this will take?
I didn't have time for it tonight, so I think it will be done somewhere tomorrow. Seems there's some issues with this libgcc thing, there's multiple views on what to include. IMHO, the new gcc layout would be: - gcc-libs - gcc - gcc-fortran - gcc-java - gcc-objc gcc-libs contains all libraries that would go in a gcc build where only C and C++ are enabled, the rest of the packages would be built as gcc-java and gcc-fortran are currently built. We could splitup these things into runtime and compilers also, but especially for java I don't see need (we would have to splitup java-gcj-compat into two pieces also, which is a no-go). Another option is to make one massive gcc package that includes compilers for all these languages. Once again, there's problems with java that pulls in X. As we have fortran and java standalone packages already that work out fine, I would prefer to have the splitup as layed out above: C/C++ in one compiler package, C/C++ runtime libs in one package and one package for each language we support (objc moves to a standalone pkg).
- syslogng needs to be reviewed
eliott brought up a worthwhile point. While it might be ugly, what's wrong with throwing glib into the 'devel' category?
glib2 is not devel, it's a lib! Also, why do we call a directory full of drivers "support"? Why not drivers or so?