pkgsrc-Changes archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: CVS commit: pkgsrc/cross/mingw-binutils

On 10/9/2012 22:12, Aleksej Saushev wrote:
John Marino<>  writes:

On 10/9/2012 21:05, Aleksej Saushev wrote:

I don't agree that we should favour somewhat experimental systems running
GCC 4.7 rather than more stable ones running GCC 4.1-4.4.
Personally, I'd rather see the package building with older compiler than
newer one, downgrading compiler is usually easier path.

You really need to watch what you say.  That is at least the
fourth time you have implicitly or explicitly insulted DragonFly
on these lists and that is uncalled for.  FYI, DragonFly has two
base compilers and the default compiler is gcc 4.4, still true
for version 3.2 to be released in two weeks.

Whether you love it or not, DragonFly is even more on fringe than
NetBSD, which is not the single platform we support.
So, please, stop putting cart before horse.

Lack of popularity doesn't give you the right to disparage any of the platforms that have chosen pkgsrc as their package repository. If not for the NetBSD-specific emulators, DragonFly would have at least the same number of packages building as the NetBSD counterparts do. Frankly, pkgsrc really should be split off of NetBSD into a separate project which might address some of this second-class citizen vibes I'm getting.

It doesn't matter whether they are declared unmaintained by GCC developers,
we are not talking about developing GCC. We're talking about building
software packages. Systems we support do use GCC 4.1, sometimes GCC 3.4 even,
and those systems are more important to us than not-yet-released Debian.

Unreleased for a matter of days.  But I believe you mean it.

I'm not avoiding GCC 4.6 as you're trying to present. But I'm concerned
that you consistently ignore those who use GCC 4.1.
You could have solved it in backwards-compatible way, pkgsrc framework
is powerful enough for that.

Alright, you give me the standard solution to this problem right now.
Patching the source is not really an option. Maybe it's a single patch, but there could be dozens of violations in an older package. I'm guessing -Werror removal would be the standard way. Luckily there doesn't seem to be too many packages with -Werror set.

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index