I'd have to agree with Jan on this one. The reason why packages don't compile on the with newer compilers is generally because the code is not standards compliant and needs fixing anyways. So the right thing to do is fix the broken packages in extra and move on. Then again, I'm not an Arch Linux developer, so that is easy for me to say. When I download some source tarball and try to compile it and it fails, I never go try it with and older compiler. If it is a application/library I really need, I patch it until it compiles. On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Baho Utot<baho-utot@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, 2009-06-15 at 00:51 +0200, Jan de Groot wrote: >> On Sun, 2009-06-14 at 18:46 -0400, Baho Utot wrote: >> >> > I have encountered many packages in extra that don't compile with >> > gcc-4.4.0. The easy way to fix them is to compile them with gcc-3.4 >> >> The easy way to fix them is by reporting bugs. Bugfixing most of these >> packages is very easy and takes us only a few minutes to fix, so why >> bother supporting an old outdated compiler that hasn't been supported >> upstream for a long while? >> > Do you really want a list of all the packages in extra that are broke? > > There are lots of them > >
