GCC-4.7.2-2: Go/No-go?

Dave Korn dave.korn.cygwin@gmail.com
Thu Apr 11 12:31:00 GMT 2013


On 11/04/2013 13:19, Corinna Vinschen wrote:

>>>> On 2013-04-11 01:02, Dave Korn wrote:
>>>>>   Yep, sure.  *sigh*, I'm sure we'll suddenly find out that someone was using
>>>>> it and wants to know where it's gone.  (I suppose if that happens I could
>>>>> always consider rolling a gcc3 package with all -3 suffixed executables.)
                              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>   If you really want to stick to an old
> gcc, make sure it's not the default.  Call it gcc-3 or legacy-gcc, but
> let's get it out of the way of the most recent version.

  Yes, that's what I meant to imply by the wording.  Different name + suffixed
executables = out of the way.

  Also, I don't plan on doing it unless there's significant demand.

    cheers,
      DaveK




More information about the Cygwin-apps mailing list