[Dovecot] Follow-up re: gcc 2.96 - Re: PATCH: compile dovecot-1.1.beta14 with gcc 2.95

[Kevin A. McGrail]

Well, for me, it's a vast number of boxes deployed and often maintained by 
others that are running stabling for 8+ years making the nuance of upgrading 
to a newer version of GCC fairly mute from a lay persons perspective. 
Seriously, how can you argue with a non-technical user that their box 
installed in 2001 has a "problem" when everything is working "fine"?

Plus it annoys Timo and that's just an extra bonus ;-)

regards,
KAM
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Asheesh Laroia" <asheesh at asheesh.org>
To: "Dovecot Mailing List" <dovecot at dovecot.org>
Cc: "Kevin A. McGrail" <kmcgrail at pccc.com>; "Sven Anderson" 
<sven at anderson.de>
Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 4:35 PM
Subject: Re: [Dovecot] Follow-up re: gcc 2.96 - Re: PATCH: compile 
dovecot-1.1.beta14 with gcc 2.95


> On Wed, 27 Feb 2008, Timo Sirainen wrote:
>
>> On Feb 27, 2008, at 4:22 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
>>
>>> I can't argue with that logic but documenting it in a wiki or INSTALL or 
>>> including the patches with the distribution might be more agreeable.
>>
>> Why are you people still using so old gcc versions?
>
> As an observer, I'd like to remark that it's amazing that 
> twentiety-century known-broken non-releases 
> <http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-2.96.html> of GCC are in use in 2008.
>
> I'm honestly curious what keeps you guys on them.
>
> -- Asheesh.
>
> -- 
> Maybe you can't buy happiness, but these days you can certainly charge it.
>