Excerpts from Peter FELECAN's message of Sun Aug 28 09:06:47 -0400 2011: > > Apart from multi-version support, we can also think about retiring the > > older versions of gcc. When there's no reason to keep an old version > > around, I'd suggest removing it, although I understand it's painful to > > remove something that e.g. once required a lot of work to get in. But > > keeping old unused software around only clutters the catalog. For > > example, there might potentially still be a use case for gcc-3, but I > > doubt that there's any reason to keep gcc2 around. What are your > > thoughts, and how would you approach the issue? > > I don't have any objection toward its removal. However, is there a > conflict with the current or future gcc releases? If there is no > conflict don't remove it.
I think we need to retain the *rt packages though...either that or also drop the few things that depend on them. I don't have any comment on whether or not that is good/bad as I don't use those packages. In this case, I'd likely err toward leaving the *rt packages around. Thanks -Ben -- Ben Walton Systems Programmer - CHASS University of Toronto C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302 _______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::.
