From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20754 invoked by alias); 20 Jan 2004 03:53:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 20745 invoked from network); 20 Jan 2004 03:53:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nile.gnat.com) (205.232.38.5) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 20 Jan 2004 03:53:06 -0000 Received: from gnat.com (ppp1.gnat.com [205.232.38.211]) by nile.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C672F2DD6; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 22:53:01 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <400CA61D.3060505@gnat.com> Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2004 03:53:00 -0000 From: Robert Dewar User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eric Botcazou Cc: Geoff Keating , Scott Robert Ladd , gcc@gcc.gnu.org, Nick Burrett , Gabriel Dos Reis , Marc Espie Subject: Re: gcc 3.5 integration branch proposal References: <90200277-4301-11D8-BDBD-000A95B1F520@apple.com> <200401192304.01694.ebotcazou@libertysurf.fr> <200401192334.35555.ebotcazou@libertysurf.fr> In-Reply-To: <200401192334.35555.ebotcazou@libertysurf.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-01/txt/msg01443.txt.bz2 Eric Botcazou wrote: >>>My point of view is exactly reverse :-) Why should a developer not >>>keep GCC working on such a machine? >> >>Because it's a waste of the developer's time? > > > Or laziness? ;-) Eric, you are becoming a bit extreme at this stage. No, it is not lazy to organize your resources effectively and avoid wasting time on goals that simply are unrealistic and make little sense. Time wasted trying to get GCC working on obsolete machines is time taken away from more important tasks.