GCC withdraw

[John Baldwin]

On Saturday, August 24, 2013 7:19:22 am David Chisnall wrote:
> On 24 Aug 2013, at 11:30, "Sam Fourman Jr." <sfourman at 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