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

[Aleksej Saushev <asau%inbox.ru@localhost>]

John Marino <netbsd%marino.st@localhost> 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.

> Debian Wheezy, which will be released very soon, is also based
> on gcc 4.7.  You don't want pkgsrc on Debian?  You don't
> consider Debian "stable"?
>
> The problems that I'm highlighting arrived with GCC 4.6 which
> was released 25 March 2011.  Are you seriously advocating that
> any system with a compiler newer than March 2011 should be
> disregarded?
>
> Moreover, GCC 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, and 4.4 have all reached
> END-OF-LIFE and are no longer maintained!  I can't believe that
> avoiding GCC 4.6.3 will be a policy here.  That would be wrong.

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.

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.


-- 
HE CE3OH...