On 12/22/14 11:20, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
On Mon, 22 Dec 2014 17:11:01 +0100 Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
[...]
(On a related note, do we really need gcc 2.95.3-r10, 3.3.6-r1, 3.4.6-r2,
4.0.4, 4.1.2, 4.2.4-r1, 4.3.6-r1, 4.4.7, 4.5.1-r1, 4.5.2, 4.5.3-r2, 4.5.4,
4.6.0, 4.6.1-r1, 4.6.2, 4.6.3, 4.6.4, 4.7.0, 4.7.1, 4.7.2-r1, 4.7.3-r1, 4.7.4,
4.8.0, 4.8.1-r1, 4.8.2, 4.8.3, 4.9.0, 4.9.1, and (deep breath) 4.9.2?
Yes, we do. There is a lot of software out there which needs
specific gcc version. E.g. I have fortran code which depends
gcc:3.4. Other example are cuda implementations which usually lag
behind mainstream gcc by one middle version.
Its not as corner as people think it is. I wasn't even thinking of cuda.
And please don't say "just fix it", some of such software is
binary, some other is too large to be updated regularly.
While one year support is a good policy for a common packages, it
is in no way an upper limit for support and core packages should be
considered carefully here.
Thank you.
Best regards,
Andrew Savchenko
--
Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D.
Gentoo Linux Developer [Hardened]
E-Mail : [email protected]
GnuPG FP : 1FED FAD9 D82C 52A5 3BAB DC79 9384 FA6E F52D 4BBA
GnuPG ID : F52D4BBA
