Re: DRAGONFLY 1.2 RELEASED!

[Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai <asmodai@xxxxxx>]

-On [20050410 22:02], walt (wa1ter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
>I've always wondered why the same configuration could not (or should not) be
>applied to gcc34 temporarily so as to avoid the ports crisis while allowing
>DF to default to gcc34.

Because people are lazy and having such a fall back mechanism will only
serve as a crutch right now where there are not that many people submitting
override ports to make the best out of the DragonFly specific features.

Not just that, but given how our code base is diverging we might miss
optimisation as well as running itno FreeBSD specific work-arounds/hacks.
(Take apr for example.)

-- 
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(at)wxs.nl> / asmodai / kita no mono
Free Tibet! http://www.savetibet.org/ | http://ashemedai.deviantart.com/
http://www.tendra.org/   | http://www.in-nomine.org/
Answering the questions that no one asks...