This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On Wednesday 02 January 2013 10:17:46 Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Wed, 2 Jan 2013, Carlos O'Donell wrote: > > I say we agree that 2.95.3 is the oldest compiler we will support > > for compiling userspace applications using glibc headers. > > Given that the headers are generally meant to support non-GCC compilers, I > think all you might gain is elimination of cases specifically for older > GCC, so that older GCC uses the same cases as non-GCC. Simply changing > __GNUC_PREREQ (2, 95) to __GNUC__ is hardly a gain. (And where the > older-GCC case is simply an optimization, or where the older-GCC and > non-GCC cases have similar functionality that's not fully conforming, I > think a more recent baseline such as 4.1 would be reasonable.) i don't think 4.1 is reasonable. i def see people actively using gcc-3.3 and gcc-3.4 today (when things break, i get reports fairly quickly). -mike
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |