From owner-svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Mon Apr 17 00:48:48 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-head@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CC10D32656; Mon, 17 Apr 2017 00:48:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gerald@pfeifer.com) Received: from ainaz.pair.com (ainaz.pair.com [209.68.2.66]) (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 4EDBCE81; Mon, 17 Apr 2017 00:48:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gerald@pfeifer.com) Received: from anthias.catalysis.at (mail.catalysis.at [101.187.5.213]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ainaz.pair.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EDA903F530; Sun, 16 Apr 2017 20:48:38 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2017 10:48:35 +1000 (AEST) From: Gerald Pfeifer To: Alexey Dokuchaev cc: ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r438577 - in head/lang/gcc46: . files In-Reply-To: <20170415125907.GA97090@FreeBSD.org> Message-ID: References: <201704150639.v3F6dmFD073186@repo.freebsd.org> <20170415125907.GA97090@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-BeenThere: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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: Mon, 17 Apr 2017 00:48:48 -0000 On Sat, 15 Apr 2017, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: >> Remove Java support (the JAVA option and CATEGORY) from this port. >> >> Four years after GCC 4.6 went end-of-life upstream there isn't really >> much use of that any more since newer ports still carry it, and it >> speeds up build and simplifies this port significantly. > Thank you, appreciated (GCC 4.6 is my default USE_GCC port). I made a similar change to lang/gcc47 as well and will consider it for lang/gcc48 later after waiting for more feedback. Why are you on GCC 4.6, though? My recommendation would be GCC 4.8 as the absolute minimum, which was the default for an extended period, or GCC 4.9, which was the default for a bit less than half a year until the recent update to GCC 5. Is there a particular reason against GCC 5 (beyond perhaps wanting to let this settle a bit more)? Gerald