Subject: Re: HEADS UP: GNOME 2.10.0
To: Greg Troxel <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Julio M. Merino Vidal <email@example.com>
Date: 03/23/2005 23:52:35
On Wed, 2005-03-23 at 10:39 -0500, Greg Troxel wrote:
> However, I doubt GNOME
> 2.x is very usable under NetBSD 1.6.2 due to the lack of native threads
> (but hey, I may be wrong).
> I've run 2.6.2 and it seems to work (glib2 requires pth instead, of
Oh, cool! My past experiences with GNOME and non-native threading were
very disappointing... but that was in the 2.2 era (and even earlier).
> You could just set these to require newer gcc.
No; the changes to let them work with gcc 2.95 are so trivial that's not
worth it (just move variable declarations from the middle of the code to
the top of the block). And they can be fed back to the mainstream
authors, who will happily adopt them.
> It would be cool to be able to declare 'c compiler for this package
> needs feature FOO', rather than 'need gcc'.
That'd be nice. Volunteering? ;-)
Julio M. Merino Vidal <firstname.lastname@example.org>
The NetBSD Project - http://www.NetBSD.org/