Re: State of gcc 2.95 use in Debian unstable
Thiemo Seufer wrote:
> Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote:
> > Also, people have some code (old completed internal projects, etc), which
> > probably would never be ported to newer C++ standards (it's plainly too big
> > job), but which are still useful to keep working - e.g. for
> > demonstration/education/similar purposes.
> > I have to deal with the both above situations. And I believe I'm far not
> > alone here. So there is user benefit from keeping gcc 2.95 in usable state.
> > Not fixing internal compiler bugs
> AFAICS this makes a point to have some (un-/little) maintained version
> of gcc-2.95 somewhere. It doesn't make a point to distribute it as part
> of an official etch release.
> > - user who faces old compiler's failure
> > to build code should seriously consider switching to newer versions - but
> > just keeping packages installable and usable.
> Apparently those packages weren't useful/important enough to bring them
> into Debian...
s/packages/programs which need gcc 2.95/, that is.