В сообщении от Пятница 29 октября 2010 23:17:18 автор Khem Raj написал: > binutils = 2.14.90.0.6,2.14.90.0.7, 2.15.94.0.1, 2.16, 2.16.1, 2.16.91.0.6, > 2.16.91.0.7, 2.17, 2.17.50.1, 2.17.50.0.5, 2.17.50.0.8, 2.17.50.0.12, 2.18, > 2.18.50.0.7, 2.18.atmel.1.0.1, 2.19, 2.19.1, 2.19.51, 2.19.51.0.3, 2.20, > 2.20.1, cvs
On 2.20.1 here, probably leaving 2.18+ should be fine, although quick grep at conf/ shows almost all versions pinned in some way. > gcc = 3.3.3, 3.3.4, 3.4.3, 3.4.4, 3.4.6, 4.0.0, 4.0.2, 4.1.0, 4.1.1, 4.1.2, > 4.2.1, 4.2.2, 4.2.3, 4.2.4, 4.3.1, 4.3.2, 4.3.3, 4.3.4, 4.4.1, 4.4.2, > 4.4.4, 4.5, csl-arm-2007q3, csl-arm-2008q1, csl-arm-2008q3 Using 4.4.4, so technically not care about anything other than 4.4.x and 4.5.x. But I think it's definitely time to kill 3.x. I'd opt for leaving 4.2+ and one patchlevel version per minor. Is there any real point in having 4 4.2.x or 4.3.x versions? > glibc = 2.2.5, 2.3.2, 2.3.3, 2.3.5+cvs20050627, 2.5, 2.6.1, 2.9, 2.10.1, > cvs Not using that, but I'd say that killing it completely maybe is a bit too much. 2.9+ or just one latest? > uclibc = 0.9.28, 0.9.29, 0.9.30, 0.9.30.1, 0.9.30.2, 0.9.30.3, 0.9.31, git Using git. Leaving just 0.9.31 and git looks good to me. > eglibc = 2.9, 2.10, 2.11, 2.12, svn Not using that, no opinion. -- http://roman.khimov.ru mailto: [email protected] gpg --keyserver hkp://subkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 0xE5E055C3
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
