[csw-maintainers] Reasons for gcc to have a separate prefix

[Peter FELECAN]

Maciej Bliziński <maciej at opencsw.org> writes:

> However, alternatives are not a viable solution for the buildfarm. We
> all work on the same hosts and we need to make it possible to build
> with gccN and gcc(N+1) at the same time.  You can't have buildfarm
> admins flip symlink every time a maintainer wants to switch between
> e.g. gcc-3 and gcc-4.

Look at how Debian maintainers solved this issue and use please
alternatives.

For a build farm there is a default gcc compiler, the current release;
alternative gcc releases should be used directly, without alternatives
help or in dedicated zones. To cripple the public packages for a specific
build farm requirement seems to me a big compromise.
-- 
Peter