[arch-general] [arch-dev-public] gcc-4.4.0 toolchain rebuild with query about gcc-gcj and related packages

[Thomas Bächler]

Allan McRae schrieb:
> Hmmm...   I thought about bumping this to 2.6.18 this time round (based 
> on nothing better that when good kernel headers became available) but 
> decided not to as 2.6.16 is still widely used given it had a backport 
> branch open for a long time (and maybe still does?).

2.6.27 will also be maintained for a few years now (no reference, I read 
this on lkml in a comment).

I think among the Arch userbase, virtually nobody uses anything older 
than 2.6.27. We always announce to be "bleeding-edge", so IMO there 
should be no problem in supporting newer kernels only.

> I guess what I think the decision comes down to is:  Are the speed gains 
> from this actually noticeable?  I'm skeptical but there are a fair 
> number of workarounds removed doing that so maybe they are.

The resulting code will probably be cleaner. I am always in favour of 
dropping legacy support.

To everyone reading this: Do you use an exceptionally old kernel (say, 
older than 2.6.27) on Arch and why? Or do you know anyone who does?

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 260 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/attachments/20090426/7e4032e4/attachment-0001.pgp>