On 6/3/06, Michael Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sat, Jun 03, 2006 at 12:56:30PM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
>[And, for the record, official end-of-life dates have approximately
>zero effect on whether or not GCC drops support for a system, and are
>therefore not useful evidence for this argument.]
Frankly, that's your problem, not my problem.
The way I see it, as long as upstream and 3rd-party software
developers are in the position GCC is in - and GCC continues to
support such old systems because our users demand it, not because we
want to - the constraints those old systems place on our shell
scripting *are* your problem.
But let's back off a level here. Please explain to me why you want to
make posix.2001 the default. It is not a thing I see any benefit to,
and therefore the negative consequences loom much larger in my mind
than they do in yours. I assume you do see some benefit to it or you
wouldn't be advocating it... I'm willing to be convinced.
zw
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
