On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 06:56:48 -0400 Loui Chang <louipc.ist@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri 18 Jun 2010 11:52 +0200, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote: > > On 18.06.2010 11:38, Ionuț Bîru wrote: > > > On 06/18/2010 09:30 AM, Allan McRae wrote: > > >> On 18/06/10 16:24, Daniel Bumke wrote: > > >>> Does anyone know what's going on with boost? It seems it was > > >>> downgraded from 1.42.0 to 1.41.0 a while back, and hasn't been > > >>> updated to the latest 1.43.0. > > >>> > > > > What's the issue here though? We have a working split package and > > everyone is happy? Bjam is a crappy build system but until CMake is > > more actively maintained by Boost (last boost-cmake release was > > 1.41) it'll have to do. Boost is an important part of C++ > > development, it should not go without update in Arch. > > Wow, this is kind of depressing. Why would some package in community > block an established library from being upgraded in extra? > In this special case, because it caused data loss of probably very important files (hence encrypted) _without_ prior warning. But there seems to be a trend starting in this direction which worries me a little. IIRC there is nothing holding back Xorg 1.8 except for legacy nvidia drivers, and that for quite a while. If that is true, it's even more depressing for me, since nobody waited for us poor ATI R500 users when catalyst dropped support. :)
