Re: [boost] Should we still be testing GCC 2.95.3?

From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-01-09 04:24:51

On Monday 09 January 2006 12:00, Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
> "Beman Dawes" <bdawes_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> news:dpsa4b$in6$1_at_sea.gmane.org...
>
> > I'm gettng pestered by the automatic regression test failure notification
> > system about Boost.Filesystem with GCC 2.95.3.
> >
> > Does anyone still care?
> >
> > I could just mark all the failures as expected,  but if no one cares
> > anymore then we ought to stop testing 2.95.3, free up the testing
> > resources and stop pestering Boost developers about 2.95.3 failures.
> >
> > --Beman
>
> I support this. Pre 3.0.0 release is a cause for huge number of
> workarounds. Specifically related to classic IO and weak templates support.
> Lets get rid of these.

Not that I care about 2.95 either, but I think the reasoning in this thread is 
a bit faulty. Developers just say "it's too old and non-conforming". But who 
knows what's used in practice, especially outside of bleeding-edge Linux 
distros?

Maybe, the procedure for retiring compilers should including posting a message 
with prominent subject to boost-users and waiting for a couple of weeks for 
feedback?

- Volodya