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 ...
John Marino
freebsd.contact at marino.st
Thu Mar 27 16:44:53 UTC 2014
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
More information about the svn-ports-all
mailing list