X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Message-ID:	<55CA3FF1.2050608@gmx.de>
Date:	Tue, 11 Aug 2015 20:33:21 +0200
From:	"Juan Manuel Guerrero (juan DOT guerrero AT gmx DOT de) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com]" <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; de; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101206 SUSE/3.1.7 Thunderbird/3.1.7
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: Keep 2.05 archives separate?
References:	<2af8c3c0-bc09-4de9-abe4-cfd6c947425a AT googlegroups DOT com> <mpob96$vvo$1 AT usenet DOT news DOT interia DOT pl> <422e9328-994e-4485-95d3-2f0911cc6f74 AT googlegroups DOT com>
In-Reply-To:	<422e9328-994e-4485-95d3-2f0911cc6f74@googlegroups.com>
X-Provags-ID:	V03:K0:lFNGcRpty/bYIFXH1EkNvRKIp4EShm+iREpWu6TAw9kthzCiKD5
	HB1e+/VqjXBlAxWaMrt5hyFcFFiTSPeysItYohc+6lPSkeduVkb3eoFpqdUdYbFeKvmoOpj
	uOuj7gmZWnD3ay4UhW8KRuTrWjIHKlcv9dcRblgJ2nzgx1tMt22NcK4QzRp5Ydwf44X3sWF
	SGgLNK+nVWerMStXJ9cfA==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults:	notjunk:1;V01:K0:cHtnd/nxGDk=:Ay+cg9MwEWn8gzOcHIQpZz
	03VDuQQcSPq8eE789+FYkvLl6cZgs5/8aXNfzMe/JgIon+2PfHwhRkSDMGL/eeoboU1LQR8JG
	lI67GqsZh8jt5VtMLzS6/Sbwm8SWiX/xDZxzCeIyx7DsOqoXHdpr3RKBolgKZNPW/3ktvu05g
	DsuKNxJKxTwFjQGLUAgaNdcjr3usXiJRewP7UFXTHShWEJlyZ5gozXTitaL2lMd7wW0pfVekV
	4fN9VB/wI4XF7pxf0yDqXPPRe0de6pXJiBNMQAC9eYEyLFv1fUAPxUYQE/aGXIIdRE8NBHvb7
	7w2Z922iWa/78Lg2KKsGFiOFpEYgI/vUB0LbtBae3NGI4s6lkB0iyAvO/gGyl2twlk41LSSqV
	/YRusJl9Y9rR6MThc4iarthkjqjHzNfVgQcTV8LzdXZ2vgb7LszR3efNoItgAOztXPUZSB/Af
	qVgnDRAgInxG+N7wK0848wldbbGWCx1mpBgovpCVyZPnX1YQ7OFc2zZP2I5QxN7P5ZbWIVhPF
	jyKbrPvISsUkfQxunxwtl444M6AkhyfQ1S3D3GfQwwfzc2Ojw9r0bgTjsHWjHhIWg7YyCOKtw
	W4Lm0u/Wqs+Udi8ykvCHOtjnB+OdrdbtPK6zGFtGhXxqvUcqfLeCyOXnyLqxGI/wW1Sbg768c
	KEe0smYStCxga06Vk9u/FKlrEHHfWHqdxJIFALnJELF7we3fgwN8dTQEbzIii4GndeTLOPxIn
	p4hk2GPTBaNtPnByBIml/k5edgvI5DeGQd4OZQ==
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Am 10.08.2015 22:16, schrieb Georg Potthast (dosusb AT googlemail DOT com) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com]:
> I wonder, do the experts think this is a bad idea? The wish that the djgpp users expressed here did not receive any response.


As I have told in another thread, I am still porting perl and groff.  This may
take a week.  After that, DJGPP 2.05 should be definitively released.  I do not
know if for a week more it is worth to create some temporary directory tree for
DJGPP 2.05.  Based on my current experience, I do not think that the porting/building
of perl and groff will rise any library specific issues, so we could make the
DJGPP 2.05 release quite now and not wait for those two ports IMHO.

Andris has already collected all 2.05 ports uploaded lately.  It is only necessary
to remove the equivalent 2.04 ports from the /beta tree.  If those ports should
be definitively deleted or only moved to some obsolete directory must be decided
by DJ.  What remains in the /beta directory after having deleted the equivalent
2.04 ports should be moved to the /current directory.  After that the /beta directory
should be empty and the update to DJGPP 2.05 finished.

This may also be the occasion the recompile a last time the library so we get all the
last changes into the library that have been lately comitted.  If the old djdev203
and djdev204 should be retained also in the /current/v2 directory must be decided.
I think that removing them is the best to avoid confusion about what is the best
to use.  But I will adhere to any desision taken.

Last but not least, IMHO we should not install all the different versions of the
same package produced for 2.05 during the last 3 or 4 months.  E.g.: it is not
necessary to have in the new 2.05 /current tree bnu225[a|b|d|s] and bnu225[a|b|d|s]r2
and bnu2251[a|b|d|s].  In the end the latest version is good enough and there
is no reason to keep the rest.  There may be other ports where a lot of versions
have been build for DJGPP 2.05 lately.

All this is only my opinion.


Regards,
Juan M Guerrero

- Raw text -