[RFC] Toolchain recipes, versions, removal and consolidation

[Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>]

Hi

There are so many versions of toolchain components gcc/binutils/glibc that
we have in metadata. I would like to reduce the number and keep supporting
the ones we really use. Right now we have recipes for

binutils = 2.14.90.0.6,2.14.90.0.7, 2.15.94.0.1, 2.16, 2.16.1, 2.16.91.0.6,
2.16.91.0.7, 2.17, 2.17.50.1, 2.17.50.0.5, 2.17.50.0.8, 2.17.50.0.12, 2.18,
2.18.50.0.7, 2.18.atmel.1.0.1, 2.19, 2.19.1, 2.19.51, 2.19.51.0.3, 2.20,
2.20.1, cvs

gcc = 3.3.3, 3.3.4, 3.4.3, 3.4.4, 3.4.6, 4.0.0, 4.0.2, 4.1.0, 4.1.1, 4.1.2,
4.2.1, 4.2.2, 4.2.3, 4.2.4, 4.3.1, 4.3.2, 4.3.3, 4.3.4, 4.4.1, 4.4.2,
4.4.4, 4.5, csl-arm-2007q3, csl-arm-2008q1, csl-arm-2008q3

glibc = 2.2.5, 2.3.2, 2.3.3, 2.3.5+cvs20050627, 2.5, 2.6.1, 2.9, 2.10.1,
cvs

uclibc = 0.9.28, 0.9.29, 0.9.30, 0.9.30.1, 0.9.30.2, 0.9.30.3, 0.9.31, git


eglibc = 2.9, 2.10, 2.11, 2.12, svn

They all use common files. So whenever there is a bugfix needed its a very
hard job to first create a common fix that works across all versions
secondly verify if it works and I am sure 80% of recipe versions mentioned
here dont even build

So I am going to propose to remove most of them which dont build and
request the distro and machine maintainers to please update the list of
toolchain components to keep.

Please voice which versions should we really really keep. This should be a
set which is buildable and functional.

If I dont hear on this in coming weeks then I have a plan in my mind on
which versions to keep

Thanks

-Khem