From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Kmzga-00013v-FQ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 06 Oct 2008 19:40:20 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KmzgY-00013I-LR for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 06 Oct 2008 19:40:19 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=39562 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KmzgY-00013F-Is for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 06 Oct 2008 19:40:18 -0400 Received: from bsdimp.com ([199.45.160.85]:55787 helo=harmony.bsdimp.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KmzgY-0003X0-44 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 06 Oct 2008 19:40:18 -0400 Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2008 17:38:22 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <20081006.173822.-1749749577.imp@bsdimp.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [patch 1/2] machine struct - use C99 initializers From: "M. Warner Losh" In-Reply-To: <200810070007.59487.paul@codesourcery.com> References: <48EA28DC.40604@sgi.com> <200810070007.59487.paul@codesourcery.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, paul@codesourcery.com Cc: andreas.faerber@web.de, jes@sgi.com In message: <200810070007.59487.paul@codesourcery.com> Paul Brook writes: : > > GCC is sufficiently C99 compliant to handle this style of : > > initializers. : > > Maybe it's not C99 compliant enough for other stuff, but on this front : > > it does just fine. : > : > You're missing the point: GCC today is not necessarily GCC 4.3+ or : > whatever has just been released these days and included in your : > favorite Linux distro. Just like Sun continues to ship GCC 3.4.3 on : > their latest OpenSolaris builds, the BeOS world and therefore its : > successor(s) are stuck with GCC 2.95.3 due to C++ ABI breakage in : > between major GCC versions. GCC 2 was originally released in '98 iirc : > and hence not C99 compliant. I'd expect your IRIX to face a similar : > issue, at EOL. : : If a host system hasn't bothered upgrading their toolchain in 10 years then I : refuse to care. If you really want to run and ancient obsolete OS you should : expect to run equally ancient software. You assume that all upgrades are a good thing. There are often serious regressions in newer software, especially in not Intel platforms, that makes it much harder to upgrade and have a working system afterwards. I'm saying there needs to be a balance between the latest and greatest, and known working software... Warner