From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11622 invoked by alias); 3 Sep 2011 13:43:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 11611 invoked by uid 22791); 3 Sep 2011 13:43:38 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-wy0-f171.google.com (HELO mail-wy0-f171.google.com) (74.125.82.171) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sat, 03 Sep 2011 13:43:24 +0000 Received: by wyh13 with SMTP id 13so3543320wyh.2 for ; Sat, 03 Sep 2011 06:43:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.220.218 with SMTP id o68mr620221wep.53.1315057402894; Sat, 03 Sep 2011 06:43:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.2.99] (cpc2-cmbg8-0-0-cust61.5-4.cable.virginmedia.com [82.6.108.62]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id fr18sm2110980wbb.9.2011.09.03.06.43.20 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sat, 03 Sep 2011 06:43:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4E622EF2.6050304@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2011 13:43:00 -0000 From: Dave Korn User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com Subject: Re: gcc4: Time to drop gcc3 from the distro? References: <20110902184056.GA11185@calimero.vinschen.de> <4E614764.8030202@gmail.com> <20110903084255.GC11185@calimero.vinschen.de> In-Reply-To: <20110903084255.GC11185@calimero.vinschen.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Sender: cygwin-apps-owner@cygwin.com List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com X-SW-Source: 2011-09/txt/msg00018.txt.bz2 On 03/09/2011 09:42, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Sep 2 22:15, Dave Korn wrote: >> On 02/09/2011 19:40, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >>> As the subject says, shouldn't we remove gcc3 from the distro finally? >>> We have 3 mingw compilers and gcc4 for Cygwin. What reason is left >>> to stick to gcc 3? >> Well, it's the only support we have for Pascal and D. > > Hmm. And I don't see a Modula-2 compiler in gcc4 either. All of them > exist as gcc frontends. I guess it's just lack of maintainers for > these packages which keeps them from being in the distro? No, it's lack of upstream development. GM2 and GPC appear to have been utterly dormant projects for quite some years now and won't build against recent GCC versions (GM2 works up to GCC-4.1.2, GPC up to some random date in early 2006). It takes a good deal of effort to keep a front-end up-to-date against mainline GCC development and they clearly just haven't had the manpower. That's why I had to stop packaging them in gcc4 releases. We've got the 3.4 releases, it didn't seem worthwhile making a special separate release just for the 3.4->4.1 change in the only one of the three languages that could be updated at all at the time. On the other hand I just found that D development has been resumed and it's been brought up to date with everything including gcc 4.6 series, so I plan to bring that back in the next gcc4 release :) cheers, DaveK