* Obsolete configurations, round 3
@ 2002-04-16 10:09 Zack Weinberg
2002-04-16 10:15 ` Lars Brinkhoff
` (3 more replies)
0 siblings, 4 replies; 35+ messages in thread
From: Zack Weinberg @ 2002-04-16 10:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc
Here is my current list of targets to deprecate.
a29k-*-*
arm-*-riscix*
c*-convex-*
elxsi-*-*
i?86-*-aix*
i?86-*-bsd*
i?86-*-chorusos*
i?86-*-dgux*
i?86-*-freebsd1.*
i?86-*-isc*
i?86-*-linux*oldld*
i?86-*-osf1*
i?86-*-osfrose*
i?86-*-rtemscoff*
i?86-*-sunos*
i?86-go32-rtems*
i?86-next-*
i?86-sequent-bsd*
i?86-sequent-ptx[12]*
i?86-sequent-sysv3*
m68[k0]*-*-lynxos*
m68[k0]*-*-rtemscoff*
m68[k0]*-*-sysv3*
m68[k0]*-altos-*
m68[k0]*-apollo-*
m68[k0]*-apple-*
m68[k0]*-bull-*
m68[k0]*-convergent-*
m68[k0]*-isi-*
m68[k0]*-next-*
m68[k0]*-sony-*
ns32k-encore-*
ns32k-merlin-*
ns32k-pc532-*
ns32k-sequent-*
ns32k-tek6[12]00-*
sparc-*-rtemsaout*
Speak up if you want one of these kept.
For further suggestions, I would like to look mostly at entire machine
architectures that could be dropped. Possible candidates for this are
1750a currently doesn't build on mainline due to
lack of support for idiosyncratic floating
point format
clipper intergraph's still around, but no port
activity since 2.95
d30v rumor has it this never taped out
i370 superseded by s390?
i860 dead since early 90s, IIRC
m88k same situation as ns32k - some netbsd/openbsd
port activity, all commercial support abandoned
pj abandoned by sun?
romp eol-ed in 1992 or so
we32k western electric went out of business
zw
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Obsolete configurations, round 3
2002-04-16 10:09 Obsolete configurations, round 3 Zack Weinberg
@ 2002-04-16 10:15 ` Lars Brinkhoff
2002-04-16 11:25 ` Zack Weinberg
2002-04-21 19:16 ` Peter A. Castro
2002-04-16 10:28 ` Richard Henderson
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 2 replies; 35+ messages in thread
From: Lars Brinkhoff @ 2002-04-16 10:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Zack Weinberg; +Cc: gcc, romp
Zack Weinberg <zack@codesourcery.com> writes:
> I would like to look mostly at entire machine architectures that
> could be dropped [from GCC]. Possible candidates for this are:
> ...
> romp eol-ed in 1992 or so
http://www.openbsd.org/romp.html
says that a port is being organized, but it seems that was written in
1998, and the mailing list archive doesn't show much recent activity.
--
Lars Brinkhoff http://lars.nocrew.org/ Linux, GCC, PDP-10,
Brinkhoff Consulting http://www.brinkhoff.se/ HTTP programming
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Obsolete configurations, round 3
2002-04-16 10:15 ` Lars Brinkhoff
@ 2002-04-16 11:25 ` Zack Weinberg
2002-04-16 12:13 ` Jim Mercer
2002-04-16 15:27 ` Jason R Thorpe
2002-04-21 19:16 ` Peter A. Castro
1 sibling, 2 replies; 35+ messages in thread
From: Zack Weinberg @ 2002-04-16 11:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Lars Brinkhoff; +Cc: gcc, romp
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 07:15:23PM +0200, Lars Brinkhoff wrote:
> Zack Weinberg <zack@codesourcery.com> writes:
> > I would like to look mostly at entire machine architectures that
> > could be dropped [from GCC]. Possible candidates for this are:
> > ...
> > romp eol-ed in 1992 or so
>
> http://www.openbsd.org/romp.html
> says that a port is being organized, but it seems that was written in
> 1998, and the mailing list archive doesn't show much recent activity.
I know; I used to have one of those and follow the mailing list. It
never got off the ground, as far as I could tell. If someone wants to
speak up for that port, fine; otherwise, I don't see any value in
keeping it around.
zw
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Obsolete configurations, round 3
2002-04-16 11:25 ` Zack Weinberg
@ 2002-04-16 12:13 ` Jim Mercer
2002-04-16 13:09 ` jpd
2002-04-16 15:27 ` Jason R Thorpe
1 sibling, 1 reply; 35+ messages in thread
From: Jim Mercer @ 2002-04-16 12:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Zack Weinberg; +Cc: Lars Brinkhoff, gcc, romp
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 11:24:54AM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 07:15:23PM +0200, Lars Brinkhoff wrote:
> > Zack Weinberg <zack@codesourcery.com> writes:
> > > I would like to look mostly at entire machine architectures that
> > > could be dropped [from GCC]. Possible candidates for this are:
> > > ...
> > > romp eol-ed in 1992 or so
> >
> > http://www.openbsd.org/romp.html
> > says that a port is being organized, but it seems that was written in
> > 1998, and the mailing list archive doesn't show much recent activity.
>
> I know; I used to have one of those and follow the mailing list. It
> never got off the ground, as far as I could tell. If someone wants to
> speak up for that port, fine; otherwise, I don't see any value in
> keeping it around.
but, but, but!
what am i to do with my collection of RT/romp gear if there is no compiler
for it?
8^)
thus far i don't see anyone making any noise.
(although i'm in no way authorative for the ROMP community)
--
[ Jim Mercer jim@reptiles.org +1 416 410-5633 ]
[ I want to live forever, or die trying. ]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Obsolete configurations, round 3
2002-04-16 12:13 ` Jim Mercer
@ 2002-04-16 13:09 ` jpd
2002-04-16 13:17 ` Miod Vallat
2002-04-17 12:01 ` Zack Weinberg
0 siblings, 2 replies; 35+ messages in thread
From: jpd @ 2002-04-16 13:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jim Mercer; +Cc: Zack Weinberg, Lars Brinkhoff, gcc, romp
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 03:05:35PM -0400, Jim Mercer wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 11:24:54AM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 07:15:23PM +0200, Lars Brinkhoff wrote:
> > > Zack Weinberg <zack@codesourcery.com> writes:
> > > > I would like to look mostly at entire machine architectures that
> > > > could be dropped [from GCC]. Possible candidates for this are:
What's the deal with dropping ports from gcc, btw?
> > > > ...
> > > > romp eol-ed in 1992 or so
> > >
> > > http://www.openbsd.org/romp.html
> > > says that a port is being organized, but it seems that was written in
> > > 1998, and the mailing list archive doesn't show much recent activity.
> >
> > I know; I used to have one of those and follow the mailing list. It
> > never got off the ground, as far as I could tell. If someone wants to
> > speak up for that port, fine; otherwise, I don't see any value in
> > keeping it around.
The OpenBSD/romp port never saw light, AFAICT, but there is/was some
4.4BSD work going on.
> but, but, but!
>
> what am i to do with my collection of RT/romp gear if there is no compiler
> for it?
Even tho I don't own a romp anymore, I can think of a few reasons to
keep a compiler for it. One is, ofcourse, historical interrest: It
is AFAIK the first risc to run un*x.
> thus far i don't see anyone making any noise.
'ey, if there's one message in a week people start to wonder how
busy the list has become. I wouln't be surprised if you lot just
caused a few heart attacks. :-)
--
j p d (at) d s b (dot) t u d e l f t (dot) n l
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Obsolete configurations, round 3
2002-04-16 13:09 ` jpd
@ 2002-04-16 13:17 ` Miod Vallat
2002-04-17 12:01 ` Zack Weinberg
1 sibling, 0 replies; 35+ messages in thread
From: Miod Vallat @ 2002-04-16 13:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: jpd; +Cc: Jim Mercer, Zack Weinberg, Lars Brinkhoff, gcc, romp
> The OpenBSD/romp port never saw light, AFAICT, but there is/was some
> 4.4BSD work going on.
Actually, there is some OpenBSD/romp work slowly going on, but we have
better use for our spare time...
If romp support is dropped from gcc, I guess it would not be too hard to
put it back if OpenBSD/romp becomes a reality.
Miod
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Obsolete configurations, round 3
2002-04-16 13:09 ` jpd
2002-04-16 13:17 ` Miod Vallat
@ 2002-04-17 12:01 ` Zack Weinberg
2002-04-19 0:25 ` jpd
1 sibling, 1 reply; 35+ messages in thread
From: Zack Weinberg @ 2002-04-17 12:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: jpd; +Cc: Jim Mercer, Lars Brinkhoff, gcc, romp
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 10:09:52PM +0200, jpd@dsb.tudelft.nl wrote:
>
> What's the deal with dropping ports from gcc, btw?
By dropping ports which no one cares about anymore, we reduce our
maintenance burden. Machine-independent changes don't have to worry
about the quirks of obsolete hardware or operating systems.
> Even tho I don't own a romp anymore, I can think of a few reasons to
> keep a compiler for it. One is, ofcourse, historical interrest: It
> is AFAIK the first risc to run un*x.
I don't think that historical interest is sufficient reason to keep
code around, when it is unused and adds complexity to the compiler
merely by existing.
However, I said earlier that we were only going to drop ports with no
constituents at all in this round, so romp-*-openbsd stays. (Do you
have any objection to ditching romp-*-aos and romp-*-mach?)
zw
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Obsolete configurations, round 3
2002-04-17 12:01 ` Zack Weinberg
@ 2002-04-19 0:25 ` jpd
0 siblings, 0 replies; 35+ messages in thread
From: jpd @ 2002-04-19 0:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Zack Weinberg; +Cc: Jim Mercer, Lars Brinkhoff, gcc, romp
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 11:55:36AM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
[snip]
>
> However, I said earlier that we were only going to drop ports with no
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
But not on romp@openbsd.org, hence the question. :-)
> constituents at all in this round, so romp-*-openbsd stays. (Do you
> have any objection to ditching romp-*-aos and romp-*-mach?)
As I suspect romp-*-aos would also be used for 4.4BSD it might be
`handy' to have gcc for it. However, since it is rather old itself
(and you're not very fond of historical intrerest :-) maybe 4.4BSD
(and AOS) can make-do with an older gcc. I've never even seen
romp-*-mach, so I can't comment on that.
This is just me speaking. (But since I'm about the only one, it seems,
it almost feels like being a spokesperson.)
--
j p d (at) d s b (dot) t u d e l f t (dot) n l
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Obsolete configurations, round 3
2002-04-16 11:25 ` Zack Weinberg
2002-04-16 12:13 ` Jim Mercer
@ 2002-04-16 15:27 ` Jason R Thorpe
1 sibling, 0 replies; 35+ messages in thread
From: Jason R Thorpe @ 2002-04-16 15:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Zack Weinberg; +Cc: Lars Brinkhoff, gcc, romp
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 11:24:54AM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> I know; I used to have one of those and follow the mailing list. It
> never got off the ground, as far as I could tell. If someone wants to
> speak up for that port, fine; otherwise, I don't see any value in
> keeping it around.
..and, hey, there's always the Attic...
--
-- Jason R. Thorpe <thorpej@wasabisystems.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Obsolete configurations, round 3
2002-04-16 10:15 ` Lars Brinkhoff
2002-04-16 11:25 ` Zack Weinberg
@ 2002-04-21 19:16 ` Peter A. Castro
1 sibling, 0 replies; 35+ messages in thread
From: Peter A. Castro @ 2002-04-21 19:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Lars Brinkhoff; +Cc: Zack Weinberg, gcc, romp
On 16 Apr 2002, Lars Brinkhoff wrote:
> Zack Weinberg <zack@codesourcery.com> writes:
> > I would like to look mostly at entire machine architectures that
> > could be dropped [from GCC]. Possible candidates for this are:
> > ...
> > romp eol-ed in 1992 or so
>
> http://www.openbsd.org/romp.html
> says that a port is being organized, but it seems that was written in
> 1998, and the mailing list archive doesn't show much recent activity.
Please don't drop ROMP. I'm still working on updates to GCC for ROMP in
prep for some porting work I'm doing (yes, some of still use the really
old hardware).
--
Peter A. Castro <doctor@fruitbat.org> or <Peter.Castro@oracle.com>
"Cats are just autistic Dogs" -- Dr. Tony Attwood
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Obsolete configurations, round 3
2002-04-16 10:09 Obsolete configurations, round 3 Zack Weinberg
2002-04-16 10:15 ` Lars Brinkhoff
@ 2002-04-16 10:28 ` Richard Henderson
2002-04-16 10:46 ` Joel Sherrill
2002-04-16 11:25 ` Zack Weinberg
2002-04-16 10:44 ` David Edelsohn
2002-04-16 21:19 ` Eric Christopher
3 siblings, 2 replies; 35+ messages in thread
From: Richard Henderson @ 2002-04-16 10:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Zack Weinberg; +Cc: gcc
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 10:04:45AM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> i370 superseded by s390?
s390 currently only works on linux, so i370 would still
be used for mvs. It'd be nice to fold whatever OS bits
into the new backend, but I certainly don't want to do
the work.
> pj abandoned by sun?
No, Sun had nothing to do with this -- it is sac's handiwork.
Poke him and see if he wants to actively maintain the thing,
otherwise kill it.
More for the list:
alpha*-*-osf[123]*
I expect everyone to be running osf[45].
r~
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Obsolete configurations, round 3
2002-04-16 10:28 ` Richard Henderson
@ 2002-04-16 10:46 ` Joel Sherrill
2002-04-16 11:12 ` Zack Weinberg
2002-04-16 15:29 ` Jason R Thorpe
2002-04-16 11:25 ` Zack Weinberg
1 sibling, 2 replies; 35+ messages in thread
From: Joel Sherrill @ 2002-04-16 10:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: gcc
Richard Henderson wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 10:04:45AM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> > i370 superseded by s390?
>
> s390 currently only works on linux, so i370 would still
> be used for mvs. It'd be nice to fold whatever OS bits
> into the new backend, but I certainly don't want to do
> the work.
>
> > pj abandoned by sun?
>
> No, Sun had nothing to do with this -- it is sac's handiwork.
> Poke him and see if he wants to actively maintain the thing,
> otherwise kill it.
>
> More for the list:
>
> alpha*-*-osf[123]*
>
> I expect everyone to be running osf[45].
What about elxsi-*-* and ns32k*-*-*?
A quick search of ChangeLogs only shows "likewise" type changes
for the past few years.
"elsxi -gcc" doesn't have any real hits on google so I have to
wonder about it.
Is the ns32k still available?
> r~
--
Joel Sherrill, Ph.D. Director of Research & Development
joel@OARcorp.com On-Line Applications Research
Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS Huntsville AL 35805
Support Available (256) 722-9985
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Obsolete configurations, round 3
2002-04-16 10:46 ` Joel Sherrill
@ 2002-04-16 11:12 ` Zack Weinberg
2002-04-16 17:15 ` Marc Espie
2002-04-17 7:38 ` Gerald Pfeifer
2002-04-16 15:29 ` Jason R Thorpe
1 sibling, 2 replies; 35+ messages in thread
From: Zack Weinberg @ 2002-04-16 11:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joel Sherrill; +Cc: gcc
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 12:39:41PM -0500, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>
> What about elxsi-*-* and ns32k*-*-*?
elxsi's already on my list. ns32k appears to still have interested
users in the Net/OpenBSD community so we're keeping it. We are
dumping all the other ns32k targets though.
Hmm, m88k's in the same boat. These look dead:
m88k-dg-*
m88k-dolphin-*
m88k-tektronix-*
m88k-*-luna*
m88k-*-sysv3*
m88k-*-coff* (?)
these should probably be kept:
m88k-*-aout*
m88k-*-openbsd*
m88k-*-sysv4* (as a basis for ELF ports)
zw
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Obsolete configurations, round 3
2002-04-16 11:12 ` Zack Weinberg
@ 2002-04-16 17:15 ` Marc Espie
2002-04-17 7:38 ` Gerald Pfeifer
1 sibling, 0 replies; 35+ messages in thread
From: Marc Espie @ 2002-04-16 17:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: zack; +Cc: gcc
In article <20020416180549.GH22450@codesourcery.com> you write:
To keep:
> m88k-*-openbsd*
Yes please.
Even though I haven't had time to look at gcc 3.1
and merge our local changes, all the OpenBSD configurations
are still alive.
Some of the ports are not too used, like mips.
Romp is half a ghost but not quite, but mvme88k still runs.
These days, OpenBSD exists on:
m68k, sparc, sparc64, i386, powerpc, vax, alpha.
The m88k port and the mips port are mostly alive (they were
working at some time in the not so distant past, and some people
are playing with it). hppa is coming together (I think it's
past single-boot on quite a few makes).
Romp might be some time in the future, who knows ?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Obsolete configurations, round 3
2002-04-16 11:12 ` Zack Weinberg
2002-04-16 17:15 ` Marc Espie
@ 2002-04-17 7:38 ` Gerald Pfeifer
1 sibling, 0 replies; 35+ messages in thread
From: Gerald Pfeifer @ 2002-04-17 7:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Zack Weinberg; +Cc: Joel Sherrill, gcc
BTW, before actually removing some configurations we should send
something to gcc-announce and wait for input from there.
(IIRC that's what has been decided some time ago, even though I
don't remember details...)
Gerald
--
Gerald "Jerry" pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at http://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/~pfeifer/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Obsolete configurations, round 3
2002-04-16 10:46 ` Joel Sherrill
2002-04-16 11:12 ` Zack Weinberg
@ 2002-04-16 15:29 ` Jason R Thorpe
1 sibling, 0 replies; 35+ messages in thread
From: Jason R Thorpe @ 2002-04-16 15:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joel Sherrill; +Cc: gcc
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 12:39:41PM -0500, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> Is the ns32k still available?
There is still an active NetBSD port to the ns32k.
--
-- Jason R. Thorpe <thorpej@wasabisystems.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Obsolete configurations, round 3
2002-04-16 10:28 ` Richard Henderson
2002-04-16 10:46 ` Joel Sherrill
@ 2002-04-16 11:25 ` Zack Weinberg
2002-04-16 11:30 ` David S. Miller
1 sibling, 1 reply; 35+ messages in thread
From: Zack Weinberg @ 2002-04-16 11:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Henderson, gcc
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 10:21:41AM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 10:04:45AM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> > i370 superseded by s390?
>
> s390 currently only works on linux, so i370 would still
> be used for mvs.
Right.
> > pj abandoned by sun?
>
> No, Sun had nothing to do with this -- it is sac's handiwork.
sac == Steve Chamberlain <sac@transmeta.com> ?
> alpha*-*-osf[123]*
Added.
zw
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Obsolete configurations, round 3
2002-04-16 10:09 Obsolete configurations, round 3 Zack Weinberg
2002-04-16 10:15 ` Lars Brinkhoff
2002-04-16 10:28 ` Richard Henderson
@ 2002-04-16 10:44 ` David Edelsohn
2002-04-16 12:06 ` Zack Weinberg
2002-04-16 16:19 ` Jason R Thorpe
2002-04-16 21:19 ` Eric Christopher
3 siblings, 2 replies; 35+ messages in thread
From: David Edelsohn @ 2002-04-16 10:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Zack Weinberg; +Cc: gcc
>>>>> Zack Weinberg writes:
Zack> i370 superseded by s390?
Not superceded. s390 is the SVR4/ELF/GNU/Linux port. i370 is the
MVS aka OS/390 aka z/OS port. The two should be merged, but i370 cannot
be dropped until that port's functionality is subsumed by s390 port.
Zack> i860 dead since early 90s, IIRC
Isn't this still used in some embedded products?
Zack> romp eol-ed in 1992 or so
*sniffle*
David
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Obsolete configurations, round 3
2002-04-16 10:44 ` David Edelsohn
@ 2002-04-16 12:06 ` Zack Weinberg
2002-04-16 13:01 ` Richard Henderson
2002-04-16 16:19 ` Jason R Thorpe
1 sibling, 1 reply; 35+ messages in thread
From: Zack Weinberg @ 2002-04-16 12:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Edelsohn; +Cc: gcc
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 01:38:02PM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> >>>>> Zack Weinberg writes:
>
> Zack> i860 dead since early 90s, IIRC
>
> Isn't this still used in some embedded products?
I believe that's i960.
zw
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Obsolete configurations, round 3
2002-04-16 12:06 ` Zack Weinberg
@ 2002-04-16 13:01 ` Richard Henderson
2002-04-16 13:08 ` law
0 siblings, 1 reply; 35+ messages in thread
From: Richard Henderson @ 2002-04-16 13:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Zack Weinberg; +Cc: David Edelsohn, gcc
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 11:25:16AM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> I believe that's i960.
Yep. The i960 zombie still lurks in the telecom arena;
as far as I know the i860 has been staked.
r~
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Obsolete configurations, round 3
2002-04-16 13:01 ` Richard Henderson
@ 2002-04-16 13:08 ` law
0 siblings, 0 replies; 35+ messages in thread
From: law @ 2002-04-16 13:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Henderson; +Cc: Zack Weinberg, David Edelsohn, gcc
In message <20020416125703.A21390@redhat.com>, Richard Henderson writes:
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 11:25:16AM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> > I believe that's i960.
>
> Yep. The i960 zombie still lurks in the telecom arena;
> as far as I know the i860 has been staked.
Yup. i960 isn't totally dead yet -- Red Hat still has customers who use them.
jeff
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Obsolete configurations, round 3
2002-04-16 10:44 ` David Edelsohn
2002-04-16 12:06 ` Zack Weinberg
@ 2002-04-16 16:19 ` Jason R Thorpe
1 sibling, 0 replies; 35+ messages in thread
From: Jason R Thorpe @ 2002-04-16 16:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Edelsohn; +Cc: Zack Weinberg, gcc
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 01:38:02PM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> Zack> i860 dead since early 90s, IIRC
>
> Isn't this still used in some embedded products?
Dunno about embedded systems, but the herds of Paragon users will sure be
upset if this goes :-)
--
-- Jason R. Thorpe <thorpej@wasabisystems.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Obsolete configurations, round 3
2002-04-16 10:09 Obsolete configurations, round 3 Zack Weinberg
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2002-04-16 10:44 ` David Edelsohn
@ 2002-04-16 21:19 ` Eric Christopher
2002-04-17 12:03 ` Zack Weinberg
3 siblings, 1 reply; 35+ messages in thread
From: Eric Christopher @ 2002-04-16 21:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc
On Tue, 16 Apr 2002 10:04:45 -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> Here is my current list of targets to deprecate.
And I'd like to add:
mips-sni-sysv4
mips-sgi-irix4loser
mips-sgi-irix4
mips-sgi-irix[3..]
mips-dec-osfrose
mips-dec-osf
mips-dec-bsd
mips-sony-bsd* | mips-sony-newsos*
mips-sony-sysv
mips-tandem-sysv4
mips-*-ultrix* | mips-dec-mach3
mips-*-riscos[56789]bsd*
mips-*-bsd* | mips-*-riscosbsd* | mips-*-riscos[1234]bsd*
mips-*-riscos[56789]sysv4*
mips-*-sysv4* | mips-*-riscos[1234]sysv4* | mips-*-riscossysv4
mips-*-riscos[56789]sysv*
mips-*-sysv* | mips-*-riscos*sysv
mips-*-riscos[56789]*
mips64orionel-*-elf*
mips64orion-*-elf*
mips64orion-*-rtems*
I'd like to get rid of:
mips-ecoff
mips-sgi-irix5
mips-sgi-irix5cross64
But I expect I'll get a lot of pushback on these. Even though sgi has
definitely EOL irix5. Years ago.
-eric
--
Written using state-of-the-rat
technology.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Obsolete configurations, round 3
2002-04-16 21:19 ` Eric Christopher
@ 2002-04-17 12:03 ` Zack Weinberg
2002-04-17 12:28 ` Eric Christopher
2002-04-17 12:32 ` Joel Sherrill
0 siblings, 2 replies; 35+ messages in thread
From: Zack Weinberg @ 2002-04-17 12:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eric Christopher; +Cc: gcc
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 08:32:42PM -0700, Eric Christopher wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Apr 2002 10:04:45 -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
>
> > Here is my current list of targets to deprecate.
>
> And I'd like to add:
Thanks. I simplified your list a bit:
mips-sgi-irix[1234]*
mips-dec-*
mips-sony-*
mips-tandem-*
mips-*-ultrix*
mips-*-riscos*
mips-*-bsd*
mips-*-sysv*
mips64orion*-*-*
with -sni-sysv4 whitelisted. In the interest of avoiding controversy
in this cycle, let's leave that and irix5 for now.
zw
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Obsolete configurations, round 3
2002-04-17 12:03 ` Zack Weinberg
@ 2002-04-17 12:28 ` Eric Christopher
2002-04-17 12:32 ` Joel Sherrill
1 sibling, 0 replies; 35+ messages in thread
From: Eric Christopher @ 2002-04-17 12:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Zack Weinberg; +Cc: gcc
>
> with -sni-sysv4 whitelisted. In the interest of avoiding controversy
> in this cycle, let's leave that and irix5 for now.
OK. Thanks.
-eric
--
Written using state-of-the-rat
technology.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Obsolete configurations, round 3
2002-04-17 12:03 ` Zack Weinberg
2002-04-17 12:28 ` Eric Christopher
@ 2002-04-17 12:32 ` Joel Sherrill
2002-04-17 12:34 ` Eric Christopher
2002-04-17 12:35 ` Zack Weinberg
1 sibling, 2 replies; 35+ messages in thread
From: Joel Sherrill @ 2002-04-17 12:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Zack Weinberg; +Cc: Eric Christopher, gcc
Zack Weinberg wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 08:32:42PM -0700, Eric Christopher wrote:
> > On Tue, 16 Apr 2002 10:04:45 -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> >
> > > Here is my current list of targets to deprecate.
> >
> > And I'd like to add:
>
> Thanks. I simplified your list a bit:
>
> mips-sgi-irix[1234]*
> mips-dec-*
> mips-sony-*
> mips-tandem-*
> mips-*-ultrix*
> mips-*-riscos*
> mips-*-bsd*
> mips-*-sysv*
> mips64orion*-*-*
>
> with -sni-sysv4 whitelisted. In the interest of avoiding controversy
> in this cycle, let's leave that and irix5 for now.
mips64orion*-*-rtems* still has users and I still build/run/report
test results on it on a regularly basis. In fact, see this
test result from 16 April 2002:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-04/msg00587.html
> zw
--
Joel Sherrill, Ph.D. Director of Research & Development
joel@OARcorp.com On-Line Applications Research
Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS Huntsville AL 35805
Support Available (256) 722-9985
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Obsolete configurations, round 3
2002-04-17 12:32 ` Joel Sherrill
@ 2002-04-17 12:34 ` Eric Christopher
2002-04-17 12:35 ` Zack Weinberg
1 sibling, 0 replies; 35+ messages in thread
From: Eric Christopher @ 2002-04-17 12:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joel Sherrill; +Cc: Zack Weinberg, gcc
>
> mips64orion*-*-rtems* still has users and I still build/run/report
> test results on it on a regularly basis. In fact, see this
> test result from 16 April 2002:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-04/msg00587.html
Cool. As long as someone still cares about it and looks at it on a
regular basis... :)
-eric
--
Written using state-of-the-rat
technology.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Obsolete configurations, round 3
2002-04-17 12:32 ` Joel Sherrill
2002-04-17 12:34 ` Eric Christopher
@ 2002-04-17 12:35 ` Zack Weinberg
1 sibling, 0 replies; 35+ messages in thread
From: Zack Weinberg @ 2002-04-17 12:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joel Sherrill; +Cc: Eric Christopher, gcc
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 02:29:31PM -0500, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>
> mips64orion*-*-rtems* still has users and I still build/run/report
> test results on it on a regularly basis. In fact, see this
> test result from 16 April 2002:
In that case it doesn't make much sense to drop the other orion
targets either. Removed from list.
zw
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Obsolete configurations, round 3
@ 2002-04-16 10:15 Richard Kenner
0 siblings, 0 replies; 35+ messages in thread
From: Richard Kenner @ 2002-04-16 10:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: zack; +Cc: gcc
a29k-*-*
I can't make a very strong argument for keeping this, but a weak one is
that it's a good example of a nearly "pure" RISC port.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Obsolete configurations, round 3
@ 2002-04-16 13:54 Richard Kenner
0 siblings, 0 replies; 35+ messages in thread
From: Richard Kenner @ 2002-04-16 13:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: jpd; +Cc: gcc
Even tho I don't own a romp anymore, I can think of a few reasons to
keep a compiler for it. One is, ofcourse, historical interrest: It
is AFAIK the first risc to run un*x.
It is also the port that drove the features that distinguished between
GCC 1 and GCC 2.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* RE: Obsolete configurations, round 3
@ 2002-04-17 8:04 Dana, Eric
2002-04-17 11:11 ` Eric Christopher
0 siblings, 1 reply; 35+ messages in thread
From: Dana, Eric @ 2002-04-17 8:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'Eric Christopher', 'gcc@gcc.gnu.org'
Eric,
My company is using Sinix:
mips-sni-sysv4
--Eric Dana--
-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Christopher [mailto:echristo@redhat.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 11:33 PM
To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Obsolete configurations, round 3
On Tue, 16 Apr 2002 10:04:45 -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> Here is my current list of targets to deprecate.
And I'd like to add:
mips-sni-sysv4
mips-sgi-irix4loser
mips-sgi-irix4
mips-sgi-irix[3..]
mips-dec-osfrose
mips-dec-osf
mips-dec-bsd
mips-sony-bsd* | mips-sony-newsos*
mips-sony-sysv
mips-tandem-sysv4
mips-*-ultrix* | mips-dec-mach3
mips-*-riscos[56789]bsd*
mips-*-bsd* | mips-*-riscosbsd* | mips-*-riscos[1234]bsd*
mips-*-riscos[56789]sysv4*
mips-*-sysv4* | mips-*-riscos[1234]sysv4* | mips-*-riscossysv4
mips-*-riscos[56789]sysv*
mips-*-sysv* | mips-*-riscos*sysv
mips-*-riscos[56789]*
mips64orionel-*-elf*
mips64orion-*-elf*
mips64orion-*-rtems*
I'd like to get rid of:
mips-ecoff
mips-sgi-irix5
mips-sgi-irix5cross64
But I expect I'll get a lot of pushback on these. Even though sgi has
definitely EOL irix5. Years ago.
-eric
--
Written using state-of-the-rat
technology.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* RE: Obsolete configurations, round 3
2002-04-17 8:04 Dana, Eric
@ 2002-04-17 11:11 ` Eric Christopher
0 siblings, 0 replies; 35+ messages in thread
From: Eric Christopher @ 2002-04-17 11:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dana, Eric; +Cc: 'gcc@gcc.gnu.org'
On Wed, 2002-04-17 at 08:02, Dana, Eric wrote:
> Eric,
>
> My company is using Sinix:
>
> mips-sni-sysv4
>
Do you track gcc releases/need a new compiler? I have no earthly way of
making sure that this even builds let alone maintain it so someone else
would need to take over that responsibility if we keep the target.
-eric
--
Written using state-of-the-rat
technology.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <20020416170445.GG22450@codesourcery.com.suse.lists.egcs>]
end of thread, other threads:[~2002-04-22 0:48 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2002-04-16 10:09 Obsolete configurations, round 3 Zack Weinberg
2002-04-16 10:15 ` Lars Brinkhoff
2002-04-16 11:25 ` Zack Weinberg
2002-04-16 12:13 ` Jim Mercer
2002-04-16 13:09 ` jpd
2002-04-16 13:17 ` Miod Vallat
2002-04-17 12:01 ` Zack Weinberg
2002-04-19 0:25 ` jpd
2002-04-16 15:27 ` Jason R Thorpe
2002-04-21 19:16 ` Peter A. Castro
2002-04-16 10:28 ` Richard Henderson
2002-04-16 10:46 ` Joel Sherrill
2002-04-16 11:12 ` Zack Weinberg
2002-04-16 17:15 ` Marc Espie
2002-04-17 7:38 ` Gerald Pfeifer
2002-04-16 15:29 ` Jason R Thorpe
2002-04-16 11:25 ` Zack Weinberg
2002-04-16 11:30 ` David S. Miller
2002-04-16 10:44 ` David Edelsohn
2002-04-16 12:06 ` Zack Weinberg
2002-04-16 13:01 ` Richard Henderson
2002-04-16 13:08 ` law
2002-04-16 16:19 ` Jason R Thorpe
2002-04-16 21:19 ` Eric Christopher
2002-04-17 12:03 ` Zack Weinberg
2002-04-17 12:28 ` Eric Christopher
2002-04-17 12:32 ` Joel Sherrill
2002-04-17 12:34 ` Eric Christopher
2002-04-17 12:35 ` Zack Weinberg
2002-04-16 10:15 Richard Kenner
2002-04-16 13:54 Richard Kenner
2002-04-17 8:04 Dana, Eric
2002-04-17 11:11 ` Eric Christopher
[not found] <20020416170445.GG22450@codesourcery.com.suse.lists.egcs>
[not found] ` <pan.2002.04.16.20.32.41.460938.1865@redhat.com.suse.lists.egcs>
2002-04-18 3:55 ` Andi Kleen
2002-04-18 11:39 ` Eric Christopher
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).