Talk:GCC Cross-Compiler for x86 64: Difference between revisions
Re: AFD |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
'''Oppose.''' There are some practical reasons not to use a >=4.3 GCC, for instance if you want to avoid the trouble of building the external libs or if you already have a setup and want to recreate it with the same versions elsewhere. Add to that my general reluctance of removing otherwise valid information, adding a note of deprecation and providing the current instructions would be more correct. - [[User:Combuster|Combuster]] 21:27, 7 September 2011 (UTC) |
'''Oppose.''' There are some practical reasons not to use a >=4.3 GCC, for instance if you want to avoid the trouble of building the external libs or if you already have a setup and want to recreate it with the same versions elsewhere. Add to that my general reluctance of removing otherwise valid information, adding a note of deprecation and providing the current instructions would be more correct. - [[User:Combuster|Combuster]] 21:27, 7 September 2011 (UTC) |
||
Understood - have made some ordering changes to the page to make things more obvious. Original page was written when <=4.3.1 was current, so I have also updated the tense used to reflect this. --[[User:Aj|Aj]] 21:04, 10 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
Latest revision as of 21:04, 10 September 2011
This page is no longer relevant (since 4.3.2/2.18). Any objections to deleting it? --Aj 15:00, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
Oppose. There are some practical reasons not to use a >=4.3 GCC, for instance if you want to avoid the trouble of building the external libs or if you already have a setup and want to recreate it with the same versions elsewhere. Add to that my general reluctance of removing otherwise valid information, adding a note of deprecation and providing the current instructions would be more correct. - Combuster 21:27, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
Understood - have made some ordering changes to the page to make things more obvious. Original page was written when <=4.3.1 was current, so I have also updated the tense used to reflect this. --Aj 21:04, 10 September 2011 (UTC)