| |||||||||||||
Day: GNOME OSDay: GNOME OSPosted Aug 9, 2012 15:22 UTC (Thu) by arafel (subscriber, #18557)In reply to: Day: GNOME OS by nix Parent article: Day: GNOME OS
Maybe. I'm not convinced it's an unrealistic desire to retain compatibility across minor version changes, personally - if you're breaking the ABI then don't call it 4.7.x.
But I try hard not to use C++, so from a personal point of view it doesn't affect me that much. ;-)
(Log in to post comments)
Day: GNOME OS Posted Aug 9, 2012 19:45 UTC (Thu) by mathstuf (subscriber, #69389) [Link]
Since a minor version bump is more likely to be done in a "stable" distro, fixing 4.7 so that it's compatible with other version series is likely better than keeping 4.7.x incompatible forever. Of course, this only matters when -std=c++11 is in effect, so the problem is unlikely to manifest unless 4.7.1 is the last release in some popular EL distro.
|
|||||||||||||