From owner-svn-ports-head@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 27 16:48:12 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 780B32C1 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 16:48:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206c::16:87]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3FAD68B4 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 16:48:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.8/8.14.8) with ESMTP id s2RGmCnG048817 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 16:48:12 GMT (envelope-from bdrewery@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from bdrewery@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.8/8.14.8/Submit) id s2RGmBTl048814 for svn-ports-head@freebsd.org; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 16:48:12 GMT (envelope-from bdrewery) Received: (qmail 33883 invoked from network); 27 Mar 2014 11:48:07 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO roundcube.xk42.net) (10.10.5.5) by sweb.xzibition.com with SMTP; 27 Mar 2014 11:48:07 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 11:48:07 -0500 From: Bryan Drewery To: marino@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r347539 - in head: biology/genpak biology/rasmol cad/chipmunk databases/typhoon databases/xmbase-grok devel/asl devel/flick devel/happydoc devel/ixlib devel/p5-Penguin-Easy editors/axe ... Organization: FreeBSD In-Reply-To: <5334555F.70806@marino.st> References: <201403082226.s28MQMtI079354@svn.freebsd.org> <20140327111602.GA57802@FreeBSD.org> <20140327130726.GD93483@FreeBSD.org> <8db20343037cfedce85801350a12fe4d@shatow.net> <5334555F.70806@marino.st> Message-ID: <8e44422e3b6932b6eaaa15d31737b342@shatow.net> X-Sender: bdrewery@FreeBSD.org User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/0.9.5 Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, Alexey Dokuchaev , owner-ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, Antoine Brodin , ports-committers@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree for head List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 16:48:12 -0000 On 2014-03-27 11:44, John Marino wrote: > On 3/27/2014 17:39, Bryan Drewery wrote: >> >> I agree completely with you. I don't understand why we remove ports >> that >> are working perfectly fine, except where broken or no upstream and >> there >> are security concerns. As a user I hate this. I still want older gcc >> and >> tcl. Portage has *32* versions of GCC while we have 4. For me, picking >> a >> development platform is all about which packages are available to test >> the portability of my code. > > To be pedantic, you are neglecting my work: > lang/gnat-aux (expiring) > lang/gcc47-aux > lang/gcc49-aux > lang/gnatdroid-armv5 > lang/gnatdroid-armv7 > > so that's 5 more right off the bat. And they differ from the vanilla > lang/gccXX, otherwise they could be combined. > I don't care or know what those are. I only care about the main GCC ports in my count. I also did not include the ADA gcc compiler in my portage count. > And as somebody who can speak to it, maintaining GCC ports is quite > demanding. they are not easy. There's a pragmatic argument to be made > here. Also older gccs are hard to keep running (see 2.95, 3.4, etc) > Sure, maybe. As I said, *not broken ports*. There is NO demand to maintain something if it just works. If it breaks, deprecate it, and then remove it if no one steps up. Perfectly fine. > John -- Regards, Bryan Drewery