Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2013 12:19:22 +0100 From: David Chisnall <theraven@FreeBSD.org> To: "Sam Fourman Jr." <sfourman@gmail.com> Cc: toolchain@FreeBSD.org, Boris Samorodov <bsam@passap.ru>, FreeBSD Current <current@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: GCC withdraw Message-ID: <DC41B4BD-159A-408B-804A-0230F3E0E52B@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <CAOFF%2BZ3vbOgMO7T-BKZnhKte6=rFoGcdYcft5kpAgNH2my1JKg@mail.gmail.com> References: <20130822200902.GG94127@funkthat.com> <105E26EE-8471-49D3-AB57-FBE2779CF8D0@FreeBSD.org> <5217413A.9080105@passap.ru> <20130823111647.GT2951@home.opsec.eu> <521745F2.8050607@passap.ru> <CAOFF%2BZ3vbOgMO7T-BKZnhKte6=rFoGcdYcft5kpAgNH2my1JKg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 24 Aug 2013, at 11:30, "Sam Fourman Jr." <sfourman@gmail.com> wrote: > So I vote, let's not give ourselves the burden of "lugging" dead = weight in > base > for another 5 years. (in 2017 do we still want to be worrying about = gcc in > base?) Perhaps more to the point, in 2017 do we want to be responsible for = maintaining a fork of a 2007 release of gcc and libstdc++? David
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?DC41B4BD-159A-408B-804A-0230F3E0E52B>