From owner-svn-ports-all@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 27 16:44:53 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 06474E37; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 16:44:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from shepard.synsport.net (mail.synsport.com [208.69.230.148]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C920B870; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 16:44:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.0.20] (unknown [130.255.19.191]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by shepard.synsport.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1F22438BD; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 11:44:31 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <5334555F.70806@marino.st> Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 17:44:15 +0100 From: John Marino User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bryan Drewery , Alexey Dokuchaev 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 ... References: <201403082226.s28MQMtI079354@svn.freebsd.org> <20140327111602.GA57802@FreeBSD.org> <20140327130726.GD93483@FreeBSD.org> <8db20343037cfedce85801350a12fe4d@shatow.net> In-Reply-To: <8db20343037cfedce85801350a12fe4d@shatow.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, Antoine Brodin , owner-ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: svn-ports-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list Reply-To: marino@freebsd.org List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 16:44:53 -0000 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. 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) John