[gentoo-dev] Re: Stable Staleness (mostly toolchain)

2006-07-31 Thread Duncan
Ryan Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Sun, 30 Jul 2006 16:56:47 -0600: Most major archs have at least some version of 3.3 and 3.4 available in stable. Sometimes even 2.95, and some lucky winners have 4.1 in ~arch. amd64 has 3.3 masked for some reason i

[gentoo-dev] Re: Stable Staleness (mostly toolchain)

2006-07-30 Thread Ryan Hill
Alec Warner wrote: Another class of packages I wish to discuss (not remove quite yet, just talking ;) ) are older packages with stable markings. By Stable I mean debian stable, IE we stabled it in 2004 and no one has touched it since. Do these packages still work with a current system (linux

[gentoo-dev] Re: Stable Staleness (mostly toolchain)

2006-07-30 Thread Alec Warner
Ryan Hill wrote: Alec Warner wrote: Another class of packages I wish to discuss (not remove quite yet, just talking ;) ) are older packages with stable markings. By Stable I mean debian stable, IE we stabled it in 2004 and no one has touched it since. Do these packages still work with a

[gentoo-dev] Re: Stable Staleness (mostly toolchain)

2006-07-30 Thread Ryan Hill
Alec Warner wrote: I'm not sure if I'm misreading here, I'm not advocating we dump older gcc versions. Moreso I'm advocating we dump code that doesn't compile with newer gcc/toolchain versions that no one is willing to fix. We have had devs in the past bring in far too many packages and then