On Fri, 2017-09-01 at 19:27 +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote: > [...] > > What matters for buster is gcc 8, and there is no current deprecation > in gcc that would affect the armel port.
Thanks for all the info! > armel is a port on borrowed time since it supports old hardware > no longer supported elsewhere, but I am not aware of any serious > current problems in the toolchain. Right, my "borrowed time" comment was primarily wrt the v4 baseline we are currently targeting, since that could break at any time and since it is already deprecated upstream may not be all that interested. I've no particular insight into when v5 will face the same situation but as you say it doesn't appear to be of immediate concern for Buster. All this seems like a pretty good argument for Roger's original proposal[0] to move to a v5t baseline which is what started this subthread. Ian. [0] <caeq9gekj8tth+rkji3doem1ftfhlnoqxgc3j+2ktdoemyoy...@mail.gmail.com>
