[MPlayer-dev-eng] [PATCH] Drop support for gcc-2.95

[Michael Niedermayer]

Hi

On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 02:59:55AM +0300, Uoti Urpala wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-07-13 at 01:00 +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> > And the reason that we will *NOT* drop support for gcc 2.95 is that we
> > have traditionally insisted on supporting it and there is only a small
> 
> That's hardly a reason...

tradition is a bad reason, i agree on that, if noone would ever change
what seems wrong then we would still have slaves (or be slaves), be
ruled by a king, have no law and so on ... :)


> 
> > minority that sees a reason to stop doing that.
> > 
> > Now drop this silly subject and stop wasting everybody's time, including
> > your own.  Several seasoned developers have spoken up in favor of
> > keeping gcc 2.95 support, none have voted against it.  I recall at least
> > Michael, Reimar, Rich, Roberto and myself in favor of gcc 2.95 and only
> 
> I don't remember Michael expressing a clear opinion in either direction.
> You, Reimar and Roberto basically said you thought the cost of support
> was low, saying little about any positive value of support.

i think the time invested in this thread exceeds the time invested in 2.95
related fixes, would you mind if this disscussion could end, it serves no
purpose, thouse who are against droping 2.95 support are in a clear majority


[...]

> The main question I want an answer to regarding 2.95 is when do you
> intend to drop support for 2.95 then? 

when will mplayer x.y be released?


> Do you see C99 features as
> worthless, 

i dont know, i am not aware of anything really significant that gcc 3+ 
supports that 2.95 didnt, furthermore using advanced features will make 
mplayer less portable to non gcc compilers ...


[...]

-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

In the past you could go to a library and read, borrow or copy any book
Today you'd get arrested for mere telling someone where the library is