cvs commit: CVSROOT modules ports MOVED ports/lang Makefile ports/lang/gcc31 Makefile distinfo pkg-descr pkg-plist ports/lang/gcc31/files patch-ad patch-af patch-ai patch-ar patch-fa patch-fb patch-fc patch-va

[Alexey Dokuchaev]

On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 05:13:52PM +0200, Michael Nottebrock wrote:
> On Monday, 1. August 2005 16:48, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> 
> > > > >   It is strongly recommended to migrate to GCC 3.4 or 4.0, since only
> > > > > these are still actively maintained upstream and support FreeBSD 7,
> > > > > for example.
> > > >
> > > > There are still plenty of software that require GCC 3.3.  This includes
> > > > various game SDK's and level editors out there I'm currently working on
> > > > porting to FreeBSD.  That is, I'd like to have gcc33 preserved for some
> > > > time.  Thanks!
> > >
> > > You need to support gcc 3.4 anyway, or you end up with USE_GCC= x.y which
> > > is evil.
> >
> > I'm talking about ~200K lines of very 3.3-specific (that is, no strict
> > standards conformant) C++ code.  I've tried converting it to 3.4, but I
> > stopped after I realized the patch would be just *huge*).
> 
> A huge patch is nowhere near as bad as build-depending on a huge compiler 
> suite ... (that's assuming your concern really is with the size - I can very 
> well imagine that 'fixing' the code would come close to a rewrite and thus a 
> fork, which would create problems of a different kind).

Exactly.  I really hate having to carry around n C/C++ compilers installed
on my system.  I usually try _really_ hard, sometimes casrificing days,
to make sure software I port compiles with any default compler for
whatever FreeBSD branch we support.  However, life is short, and in some
cases, fixing all those tedious C++ standards issues seems just a waste
of precious time.

You are right, I wasn't quite clear.  Of course I don't mind having a
huge patch FWIW.  It's the time I can come up with one matters.

./danfe