> Except of course when someone decides to inflict a > new compiler on it when the old one was working fine. > > Fred Wright
Yes, after I last updated the gcc ports on older systems, I also then left gcc-7 as the default compiler for a very very long time specifically to avoid problems -- and very successfully, I would say. However, barracuda and others were very (very very very very) enthusiastic about pushing the compiler up to gcc-14, and I started to fear that it was going to get pushed in a hopelessly broken state that would completely break everything, unless someone stepped up to make sure it was done correctly. There was indeed considerable risk of this at points. So I did spend nearly a month of my own time shepherding the upgrade to gcc-14 so that it would be done right, and not in a shabby, broken fashion. And it was, in the end, done right I think, with as little uproar as there could have been with such a jump. Of course, had I known we were about to drop Tiger I would not have spent so much time making sure Tiger survived the upgrade, certainly. As previously mentioned, I am sorry you missed the 287 posts in the PR to upgrade the compiler, and the dozens of mailing list messages about the upgrade. I suppose I could have reached out specifically emailed you asking for your opinion. To avoid this from happening in the future, you could become the maintainer of the gcc ports if you like. I think we would all appreciate that, and then you could be in charge of everything forever and this would never, ever happen to you again. Ken
