On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 12:26:19AM +0200, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > Am Sonntag, 23. April 2017, 14:35:48 CEST schrieb Michał Górny: > > Hi, > > > > I'm thinking of masking old versions of sys-devel/gcc, in particular > > older than the 4.9 branch. > > > > Masking is fine; some time later (maybe in a few months) I'd even suggest > masking all of gcc-4. After all, unmasking them if you really need them is > rather easy. > > About removing them (what William proposed), I'd keep what we have now. We > had > this discussion already in lots of detail in the past, and convincing points > were made to keep one of each 4.x ...
I"m not talking about 4.x, just 2.x and 3.x. I'm not even talking about masking 4.x. I'm sure there may be reasons to keep these in the tree. I'm just questioning why we need 2.x and 3.x in the main tree. As has been said by others on the thread, those really old versions could probably go to the toolchain overlay. William
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
