From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Aug 29 14:58:25 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@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 ESMTP id A05048C6;
 Thu, 29 Aug 2013 14:58:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org)
Received: from bigwig.baldwin.cx (bigwig.baldwin.cx [IPv6:2001:470:1f11:75::1])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 748F82DBF;
 Thu, 29 Aug 2013 14:58:25 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from jhbbsd.localnet (unknown [38.105.238.108])
 by bigwig.baldwin.cx (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 65DD0B9C1;
 Thu, 29 Aug 2013 10:58:24 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: GCC withdraw
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 10:57:42 -0400
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (FreeBSD/8.2-CBSD-20110714-p28; KDE/4.5.5; amd64; ; )
References: <20130822200902.GG94127@funkthat.com>
 <CAOFF+Z3vbOgMO7T-BKZnhKte6=rFoGcdYcft5kpAgNH2my1JKg@mail.gmail.com>
 <DC41B4BD-159A-408B-804A-0230F3E0E52B@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <DC41B4BD-159A-408B-804A-0230F3E0E52B@FreeBSD.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201308291057.43027.jhb@freebsd.org>
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7
 (bigwig.baldwin.cx); Thu, 29 Aug 2013 10:58:24 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: "Sam Fourman Jr." <sfourman@gmail.com>, toolchain@freebsd.org,
 David Chisnall <theraven@freebsd.org>, Boris Samorodov <bsam@passap.ru>,
 FreeBSD Current <current@freebsd.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
 <freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-current>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
 <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 14:58:25 -0000

On Saturday, August 24, 2013 7:19:22 am David Chisnall wrote:
> On 24 Aug 2013, at 11:30, "Sam Fourman Jr." <sfourman@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > So I vote, let's not give ourselves the burden of "lugging" dead weight in
> > base
> > for another 5 years. (in 2017 do we still want to be worrying about gcc in
> > base?)
> 
> Perhaps more to the point, in 2017 do we want to be responsible for
> maintaining a fork of a 2007 release of gcc and libstdc++?

This is a red herring and I'd wish you'd stop bringing it up constantly.
GCC has not needed constant care and feeding in the 7.x/8.x/9.x branches
and it won't need it in 10.x either.  I have not seen any convincing
argument as to why leaving GCC in the base for 10.x impedes anything.
Because clang isn't sufficient for so many non-x86 platforms we can't
really start using clang-specific features yet anyway.

-- 
John Baldwin