From kde-core-devel  Thu Mar 10 18:43:31 2005
From: Thiago Macieira <thiago () kde ! org>
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 18:43:31 +0000
To: kde-core-devel
Subject: Re: (gcc 2.95 support) kdeextragear-1/amarok/src
Message-Id: <200503101544.01111.thiago () kde ! org>
X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-core-devel&m=111048025514977
MIME-Version: 1
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="--nextPart2609208.LCB5oOPJMN"

--nextPart2609208.LCB5oOPJMN
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

Adriaan de Groot wrote:
>> How much longer do we have to support gcc 2.95 for? I must say I have
>> a great deal of distaste that we must make our code more ugly for the
>> sake of an old compiler. I do understand that people want to continue
>> to use it, but I just wonder how much longer they will do so. Thanks,

At least for all 3.x releases, since we promised to.

=46or KDE 4, I'd like to see that revised. gcc 2.95 will be 6 years old by=
=20
then. I say we move gcc 2.95 support from "required" to "would be nice".

>Until it is no longer the system compiler on a supported platform. That
>includes Debian stable and FreeBSD 4-STABLE. For the FBSD side, 4.11 was
> just released and 4-STABLE is now called "legacy". I believe it will be
> retired in a year. Um, no:
>
>RELENG_4_11  4.11-RELEASE  Extended  January 25, 2005  January 31, 2007

Debian's old releases don't count, because they won't be using recent KDEs=
=20
any time soon either. When they get to KDE 4, they'll probably be using=20
gcc 4 or 3.4 as well.

=46reeBSD worries me, though. Is STABLE getting updates as well? Or, asked=
=20
in another way, will KDE 4 make it into FreeBSD 4.x?

Also, take a look at the emails sent just after 3.3.0 was released. We had=
=20
a bug/crash in our code that was caused by a miscompilation. The gcc=20
developers won't fix it.

So, why are we supporting a broken compiler that won't be fixed? I'm not=20
talking about missing features...

>Oh, if you're moaning about having to support gcc 2.95, be glad that KDE
>doesn't officially support any of the other C++ compilers out there,
> which are even more picky.

I'd like to see some more strictness added to our code, yes. Every time a=20
new gcc version is released, we have to do that anyways.

=2D-=20
  Thiago Macieira  -  thiago (AT) macieira (DOT) info
    PGP/GPG: 0x6EF45358; fingerprint:
    E067 918B B660 DBD1 105C  966C 33F5 F005 6EF4 5358

5. Swa he g=C3=A9anhwearf t=C3=B3 timbran, and hwonne he c=C3=B3m, l=C3=A1!=
 Unix cw=C3=A6=C3=B0 "Hello,=20
World". =C7=BCfre =C7=BDghwilc w=C3=A6s gl=C3=A6d and seo woruld w=C3=A6s f=
r=C3=A9o.

--nextPart2609208.LCB5oOPJMN
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBCMJVwM/XwBW70U1gRAvTgAKC4ws6nejWtwkQZbXkw6h40M9OjuQCgqVL8
q02hlTrvqBs+B/47ketYYVY=
=c0QQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--nextPart2609208.LCB5oOPJMN--