-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 13/12/12 06:49 PM, William Hubbs wrote: > For example, glibc-2.9 and gcc-2.95. I think that if we are going > to keep things this old in the tree we need a good reason for > them.
iirc, gcc-2.95 and linux-2.4 (still used for some embedded systems) play best together. > I'm wondering if packages assigned to maintainer-needed should be > looked at and removed since no one cares about them after they have > sat there for a certain amount of time? They are, aren't they? treecleaners has been doing a pretty good job of that iirc. At least, those that have had bugs filed against them without being addressed... -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlDKl7oACgkQ2ugaI38ACPD9FQD/Sw84dF4c2cEHgoYehzufFna0 pppHdUw9zxQo5Z92FvAA/1di1VUJnoF7K8fviqi+y5MBwHTCN27lfaYguc8ukQf9 =yjYK -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
