From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 58706 invoked by alias); 4 Dec 2017 18:55:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 58694 invoked by uid 89); 4 Dec 2017 18:55:19 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_RED autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: relay1.mentorg.com Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2017 18:55:00 -0000 From: Joseph Myers To: Adhemerval Zanella CC: , John Paul Adrian Glaubitz Subject: Re: RFC: remove the "tile" architecture from glibc In-Reply-To: <2f17cd21-598f-97c9-215c-1a4e533629d7@linaro.org> Message-ID: References: <1a57be83-3349-5450-ee4f-d2a33569a728@mellanox.com> <995aac59-2f9d-2a6a-2b5c-b827410ad295@physik.fu-berlin.de> <1d4c3707-ff44-15b2-9eb4-ec5174e3f007@physik.fu-berlin.de> <15306eb4-759b-1dbf-d605-bfa62e9fdaf3@linaro.org> <2f17cd21-598f-97c9-215c-1a4e533629d7@linaro.org> User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-ClientProxiedBy: svr-ies-mbx-01.mgc.mentorg.com (139.181.222.1) To SVR-IES-MBX-03.mgc.mentorg.com (139.181.222.3) X-SW-Source: 2017-12/txt/msg00095.txt.bz2 On Mon, 4 Dec 2017, Adhemerval Zanella wrote: > I personally think it is too restrictive to remove the architecture in > such case if the minimum glibc required GCC version still provides support. If the support for some architecture in GCC is no longer considered worth maintaining / updating (because, probably, the architecture itself is obsolescent), I think that is reasonable evidence that the support in glibc is also not worth maintaining / updating, even while it can in fact be built with older GCC versions. -- Joseph S. Myers joseph@codesourcery.com