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
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 j
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 wor
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 2
