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

From: Jim Douglas (jim_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-01-09 05:53:44

Martin Wille wrote:
> Vladimir Prus wrote:
> If a Linux (or any other OS) distribution still uses gcc 2 then it is 
> unlikely the distribution wants to support modern versions of Boost, 
> anyway (if it supports Boost at all).

FWIW the latest QNX 6.3.0 distro has gcc 2.95.3 as its default compiler 
although it also ships with gcc 3.3.5. I did try running regression 
tests with it at one stage but it threw up many errors.

I don't think anyone in their right mid would start a new project with 
gcc 2.95.3, but I know there are developers out there using gcc 2.95.3 
on existing long-term projects. At least one of them has enquired 
whether he can use the smart_ptr library to solve a problem that has 
been bothering them for some time.

The work involved in changing compiler versions during a project is not 
insignificant.

Maybe I could suggest that we could clearly mark those libraries that 
will/not work with 2.95.3 and gradually withdraw support for new 
development? Bear in mind that in my case I have to consider the use of 
the old 2.95.3 compiler with the much more modern Dinkum C++ standard 
library (as well as the associated old GNU C++ library).

I will try to ascertain what QSSL's future plans are for the older 
compiler and library and report back.

Regards
Jim Douglas