Jason Bacon <bacon4000%gmail.com@localhost> writes:
On 12/31/17 03:01, coypu%sdf.org@localhost wrote:
On Sat, Dec 30, 2017 at 03:28:12PM -0600, Jason Bacon wrote:
Is there any advantage to using base 4.8 for C besides avoiding the gcc
dependency until a C++ package is built?
yes, not needing support for the latest pkgsrc gcc.
Lack of support for gcc packages is a non-option for RHEL/CentOS.
They're among the most important benefits pkgsrc provides on these
platforms.
So maybe this logic should only be enabled for certain platforms where
the gcc packages are essential.
I didn't mean 'not needing support'.
What I meant is that on platforms where base gcc is ok for C, it would
be nice if people who are not building anything in C++ don't have to
incur the cost of building the gcc5 package
I didn't mean to couple that at all with "building gcc from pkgsrc won't
work".
If you are taking care of Linux and want to force both C and C++ to the
same, built from pkgsrc, versions, then I don't have any basis to
question your judgement.
I realize that fortran adds to the mix, and that perhaps people also
want to build pkgsrc gcc to get gfortran, and this may lead to
PKGSRC_GFORTRAN_VERSION.
I also realize that this might or might not turn into "the number of
actual people helped by avoiding a new compiler for C will be nearly
zero, so let's skip the complexity".
However, there's another wrinkle, with copyu@ pointed out to me in
private mail, which is that on some platforms, pkgsrc gcc doesn't build.
There, I think we have to just let things be as they are and not impose
the new behavior.