[PATCH 0/2] obsolete some old targets

[PATCH 0/2] obsolete some old targets

[tbsaunde+gcc]

From: Trevor Saunders <tbsaunde+gcc@tbsaunde.org>

Hi,

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-12/msg00365.html reminded me I hadn't
gotten around to marking *-knetbsd and openbsd 2/3 obsolete as I offered to do
back in the spring.

I tested I could still build on x86_64-linux-gnu, and could only cross compile
to i386-openbsd2 i386-openbsd3 and x86_64_64-knetbsd-gnu with
--enable-obsolete.  Given how late in the cycle we are I'm not sure if we
should remove these targets as soon as stage 1 opens, but we might as well
obsolete them I guess, ok to commit?

Trev


Trevor Saunders (2):
  mark *-knetbsd-* as obsolete
  obsolete openbsd 2.0 and 3.X

 gcc/config.gcc | 4 +++-
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

-- 
2.4.0

[PATCH 2/2] obsolete openbsd 2.0 and 3.X

[tbsaunde+gcc]

From: Trevor Saunders <tbsaunde+gcc@tbsaunde.org>

gcc/ChangeLog:

2015-12-14  Trevor Saunders  <tbsaunde+gcc@tbsaunde.org>

	* config.gcc: Makr openbsd 2.0 and 3.X as obsolete.
---
 gcc/config.gcc | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/gcc/config.gcc b/gcc/config.gcc
index 59f77da..35ae048 100644
--- a/gcc/config.gcc
+++ b/gcc/config.gcc
@@ -238,6 +238,8 @@ md_file=
 case ${target} in
 # Currently there are no obsolete targets.
  *-knetbsd-*				\
+ | *-openbsd2*				\
+ | *-openbsd3*				\
  )
     if test "x$enable_obsolete" != xyes; then
       echo "*** Configuration ${target} is obsolete." >&2
-- 
2.4.0

[PATCH 1/2] mark *-knetbsd-* as obsolete

[tbsaunde+gcc]

From: Trevor Saunders <tbsaunde+gcc@tbsaunde.org>

gcc/ChangeLog:

2015-12-14  Trevor Saunders  <tbsaunde+gcc@tbsaunde.org>

	* config.gcc: mark knetbsd targets as obsolete.
---
 gcc/config.gcc | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/gcc/config.gcc b/gcc/config.gcc
index 882e413..59f77da 100644
--- a/gcc/config.gcc
+++ b/gcc/config.gcc
@@ -237,7 +237,7 @@ md_file=
 # Obsolete configurations.
 case ${target} in
 # Currently there are no obsolete targets.
- nothing				\
+ *-knetbsd-*				\
  )
     if test "x$enable_obsolete" != xyes; then
       echo "*** Configuration ${target} is obsolete." >&2
-- 
2.4.0

Re: [PATCH 2/2] obsolete openbsd 2.0 and 3.X

[Mike Stump]

On Dec 14, 2015, at 7:55 PM, tbsaunde+gcc@tbsaunde.org wrote:
> 	* config.gcc: Makr openbsd 2.0 and 3.X as obsolete.

English:

Mark...

Re: [PATCH 1/2] mark *-knetbsd-* as obsolete

[Mike Stump]

On Dec 14, 2015, at 7:55 PM, tbsaunde+gcc@tbsaunde.org wrote:
> 	* config.gcc: mark knetbsd targets as obsolete.

English:

  Mark...

Re: [PATCH 1/2] mark *-knetbsd-* as obsolete

[Andreas Schwab]

tbsaunde+gcc@tbsaunde.org writes:

> diff --git a/gcc/config.gcc b/gcc/config.gcc
> index 882e413..59f77da 100644
> --- a/gcc/config.gcc
> +++ b/gcc/config.gcc
> @@ -237,7 +237,7 @@ md_file=
>  # Obsolete configurations.
>  case ${target} in
>  # Currently there are no obsolete targets.
> - nothing				\
> + *-knetbsd-*				\

The comment is obsolete.

Andreas.

-- 
Andreas Schwab, SUSE Labs, schwab@suse.de
GPG Key fingerprint = 0196 BAD8 1CE9 1970 F4BE  1748 E4D4 88E3 0EEA B9D7
"And now for something completely different."

Re: [PATCH 0/2] obsolete some old targets

[Jeff Law]

On 12/14/2015 08:55 PM, tbsaunde+gcc@tbsaunde.org wrote:
> From: Trevor Saunders <tbsaunde+gcc@tbsaunde.org>
>
> Hi,
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-12/msg00365.html reminded me I hadn't
> gotten around to marking *-knetbsd and openbsd 2/3 obsolete as I offered to do
> back in the spring.
>
> I tested I could still build on x86_64-linux-gnu, and could only cross compile
> to i386-openbsd2 i386-openbsd3 and x86_64_64-knetbsd-gnu with
> --enable-obsolete.  Given how late in the cycle we are I'm not sure if we
> should remove these targets as soon as stage 1 opens, but we might as well
> obsolete them I guess, ok to commit?
>
> Trev
>
>
> Trevor Saunders (2):
>    mark *-knetbsd-* as obsolete
>    obsolete openbsd 2.0 and 3.X
With the fixes pointed out by Mike and Andreas fixed, this is fine for 
the trunk.

Can you mark interix as obsolete?  It hasn't even built for a long time.

jeff

Re: [PATCH 0/2] obsolete some old targets

[Trevor Saunders]

On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 02:32:47PM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 12/14/2015 08:55 PM, tbsaunde+gcc@tbsaunde.org wrote:
> >From: Trevor Saunders <tbsaunde+gcc@tbsaunde.org>
> >
> >Hi,
> >
> >http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-12/msg00365.html reminded me I hadn't
> >gotten around to marking *-knetbsd and openbsd 2/3 obsolete as I offered to do
> >back in the spring.
> >
> >I tested I could still build on x86_64-linux-gnu, and could only cross compile
> >to i386-openbsd2 i386-openbsd3 and x86_64_64-knetbsd-gnu with
> >--enable-obsolete.  Given how late in the cycle we are I'm not sure if we
> >should remove these targets as soon as stage 1 opens, but we might as well
> >obsolete them I guess, ok to commit?
> >
> >Trev
> >
> >
> >Trevor Saunders (2):
> >   mark *-knetbsd-* as obsolete
> >   obsolete openbsd 2.0 and 3.X
> With the fixes pointed out by Mike and Andreas fixed, this is fine for the
> trunk.
> 
> Can you mark interix as obsolete?  It hasn't even built for a long time.

 Sure, I can do that if you want, I just wasn't sure before you wanted
 to.

 Trev

> 
> jeff

Re: [PATCH 0/2] obsolete some old targets

[Jeff Law]

On 12/15/2015 03:02 PM, Trevor Saunders wrote:
>>
>> Can you mark interix as obsolete?  It hasn't even built for a long time.
>
>   Sure, I can do that if you want, I just wasn't sure before you wanted
>   to.
Please do.  I know we've been round and round on that one before, but 
given it hasn't been building since 2012, I think obsoleting is appropriate.

Fixing it wouldn't be hard, it just doesn't seem worth the effort.

jeff

Re: [PATCH 0/2] obsolete some old targets

[Trevor Saunders]

On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 03:36:18PM +0100, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I talked with devs and it will be better to just keep it removed and focus on native NetBSD with NetBSD userland.
> 
> Actually nobody seems to be interested in the Debian/NetBSD distribution.

that's what I thought from googling, so I'll just go ahead and commit
these patches.

Trev

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> > Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2015 at 3:24 PM
> > From: "Trevor Saunders" <tbsaunde@tbsaunde.org>
> > To: "Kamil Rytarowski" <n54@gmx.com>
> > Cc: tbsaunde+gcc@tbsaunde.org
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] obsolete some old targets
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:37:47PM +0100, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > > Hash: SHA256
> > > 
> > > I want to keep knetbsd alive. My application for FSF is still ongoing.
> > > 
> > > Please hold on.
> > 
> > Well, These patches aren't going to make resurrecting knetbsd
> > significantly harder, there isn't even a significant amount of knetbsd
> > specific code in gcc, so even removing it should be easily reverted
> > should that become desirable.  On the other hand it doesn't seem like
> > removing the knetbsd specific code will help much at the moment either.
> > So I guess it doesn't really matter one way or another to me.
> > 
> > Trev
> > 
> > > 
> > > Thanks
> > > 
> > > On 15.12.2015 04:55, tbsaunde+gcc@tbsaunde.org wrote:
> > > > From: Trevor Saunders <tbsaunde+gcc@tbsaunde.org>
> > > > 
> > > > Hi,
> > > > 
> > > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-12/msg00365.html reminded me
> > > > I hadn't gotten around to marking *-knetbsd and openbsd 2/3
> > > > obsolete as I offered to do back in the spring.
> > > > 
> > > > I tested I could still build on x86_64-linux-gnu, and could only
> > > > cross compile to i386-openbsd2 i386-openbsd3 and
> > > > x86_64_64-knetbsd-gnu with --enable-obsolete.  Given how late in
> > > > the cycle we are I'm not sure if we should remove these targets as
> > > > soon as stage 1 opens, but we might as well obsolete them I guess,
> > > > ok to commit?
> > > > 
> > > > Trev
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Trevor Saunders (2): mark *-knetbsd-* as obsolete obsolete openbsd
> > > > 2.0 and 3.X
> > > > 
> > > > gcc/config.gcc | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1
> > > > deletion(-)
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > > Version: GnuPG v2
> > > 
> > > iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJWcp6JAAoJEEuzCOmwLnZs6IEQAKzugPu0CurmIRNyLR6oyTd3
> > > sTTt/ffzD3RibyJEIVjTBC5tfOFcnS2Mi57TRdN5lDfyF1gwsPpvcY5Ce+WTjnHf
> > > 4Npi/SDego2HPQka5laeJv/MJdBrc7f5bncowcicrZMvo1QImYA4BFQuRk3rMSWj
> > > y31GUlTlP7yQFQ0FSXGFegkEZ7J/LqYmW+piSMhqEcqnRD6FJgGNwGPIngdQ3HvE
> > > w4z37n1Bs8qD9P6AW0D3YZfvDKn7GbGGTVq3uk1MI78hivXdCgXPyY3qnhVCmTjj
> > > 2dAX2h0Tl5aYBbVseO2ecPm/U7BnOYQBACnysnNjh3TLBzIjoXrt1Sao1m2aywj/
> > > f1+LUS2ySknZKidJRNGO/IqrhDIG2Qgmrn2MQDofTCFIwcrvZkt2wRqjBhf7IaCc
> > > Y5o7/emwj+dbfbPQNvu7RS6kFtOS4JXgs8b8D3oXHc9D9BNWYWEu5XSIWK+1HwwF
> > > 3wMcqZoZdqDFm1swM1XjOFpMjengq4AY8HAEROnj1p1qG4LhFKD84qFnELpEDowa
> > > leG9B+l9yoJQVi2GgZA8XmE7gT54oHu+pqlL7N/FgMNRS1rg4YUmAF6DOWl9cWm+
> > > NAdugbI+6VDUcvhgtrPIUv378Zn2jSUwzdl+hFp9C+jrwsc0KQN8Sg3a1wX3e8yf
> > > 0nsnHzcG0ulJnBPTDdEN
> > > =RMIO
> > > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > 

Re: [PATCH 0/2] obsolete some old targets

[Trevor Saunders]

On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 03:25:18PM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 12/15/2015 03:02 PM, Trevor Saunders wrote:
> >>
> >>Can you mark interix as obsolete?  It hasn't even built for a long time.
> >
> >  Sure, I can do that if you want, I just wasn't sure before you wanted
> >  to.
> Please do.  I know we've been round and round on that one before, but given
> it hasn't been building since 2012, I think obsoleting is appropriate.

ok, I committed these two patches and a third obsoleting interix, given
its mechanical the same as these I took this as approval to go ahead
with it and save you a second of review time.  If oyu object obviously
we can change that.

> Fixing it wouldn't be hard, it just doesn't seem worth the effort.

agreed

Trev

> 
> jeff