This is the mail archive of the cygwin-apps mailing list for the Cygwin project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: GCC-4.7.2-2: Go/No-go?


On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 2:19 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Apr 11 13:14, Dave Korn wrote:
>> On 11/04/2013 11:13, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> > On Apr 11 01:58, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
>> >> On 2013-04-11 01:02, Dave Korn wrote:
>> >>>   Yep, sure.  *sigh*, I'm sure we'll suddenly find out that someone was using
>> >>> it and wants to know where it's gone.  (I suppose if that happens I could
>> >>> always consider rolling a gcc3 package with all -3 suffixed executables.)
>> >> 3.4 is EOL and should have been dropped long ago; we simply don't
>> >> have the resources to support it ourselves.  Just about any software
>> >> that people are building today either works with recent 4.x or the
>> >> distros have a patch for it.
>> >
>> > FWIW, I agree.
>> >
>> >
>> > AOL-Corinna
>>
>>   I said I could consider it, I didn't say I was necessarily going to do it :)
>>
>>   Still, you'd be surprised the number of questions I see on random websites
>> (stackoverflow, linuxquestions and similar) where someone's asking how to
>> install an old GCC to build some old software.
>
> So what?  It's definitely wrong that our "gcc" package installs an old
> gcc, rather than a recent one.  If you really want to stick to an old
> gcc, make sure it's not the default.  Call it gcc-3 or legacy-gcc, but
> let's get it out of the way of the most recent version.

Speaking of which......   4.8 is out.......


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]