[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       gentoo-dev
Subject:    Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: masking old versions of sys-devel/gcc
From:       Andrew Savchenko <bircoph () gentoo ! org>
Date:       2017-04-27 22:56:18
Message-ID: 20170428015618.d3e5f78797bd4dc394b3befc () gentoo ! org
[Download RAW message or body]


On Thu, 27 Apr 2017 10:27:08 -0500 William Hubbs wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 12:26:19AM +0200, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> > Am Sonntag, 23. April 2017, 14:35:48 CEST schrieb Michał Górny:
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > I'm thinking of masking old versions of sys-devel/gcc, in particular
> > > older than the 4.9 branch.
> > > 
> > 
> > Masking is fine; some time later (maybe in a few months) I'd even suggest 
> > masking all of gcc-4. After all, unmasking them if you really need them is 
> > rather easy.
> > 
> > About removing them (what William proposed), I'd keep what we have now. We had 
> > this discussion already in lots of detail in the past, and convincing points 
> > were made to keep one of each 4.x ...
> 
> I"m not talking about 4.x, just 2.x and 3.x. I'm not even talking about
> masking 4.x. I'm sure there may be reasons to keep these in the tree.
> 
> I'm just questioning why we need 2.x and 3.x in the main tree.

I still use fortran software which needs 3.4.x g77. There may be
similar cases for people to use 2.95. IMO removing older gcc will
do much more harm than good.

Best regards,
Andrew Savchenko

[Attachment #3 (application/pgp-signature)]

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]