Diego Biurrun <[email protected]> writes:

> On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 11:03:21AM +0100, Måns Rullgård wrote:
>> Diego Biurrun <[email protected]> writes:
>> > --- a/configure
>> > +++ b/configure
>> > @@ -2065,9 +2065,6 @@ probe_cc(){
>> >          gcc_ext_ver=$(expr "$gcc_version" : ".*$gcc_pkg_ver $gcc_basever 
>> > \\(.*\\)")
>> >          _ident=$(cleanws "gcc $gcc_basever $gcc_pkg_ver $gcc_ext_ver")
>> > -        if ! $_cc -dumpversion | grep -q '^2\.'; then
>> > -            _depflags='-MMD -MF $(@:.o=.d) -MT $@'
>> > -        fi
>> 
>> What harm does this do?  Despite not being officially supported, gcc
>> 2.95 still builds the code just fine.  Keeping that line there is hardly
>> a burden.
>
> It does not build here, I get 7 or so errors and the file with the
> redirected stderr has 30k lines of warnings.

Yes, it spews warnings like crazy.  So do the Windows builds.  Shall we
remove Windows support then?

> More code to support gcc 2.95 was removed from configure in the past,
> this hunk I just overlooked.  Let's get rid of it.

Why are you so eager to delete things?  The presence of that line is not
causing any problems.

-- 
Måns Rullgård
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
libav-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel

Reply via email to