The hppa port is now moved out of ports.

The hppa port is now moved out of ports.

[Carlos O'Donell]

Joseph,

The hppa port is now in libc.

The disassembly of the shared libraries appears identical.

The hppa port doesn't depend on any other ports ports 
so no #includes needed adjusting.

The hppa port uses the preferred sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/hppa/nptl.

The move ChangeLog entry was added to the top-level ChangeLog
indicating that hppa now uses that top-level ChangeLog.

There are no more ports left in ports.

Is there any other next step (other than fixing 
up more of the hppa port)?

Cheers,
Carlos.

Re: The hppa port is now moved out of ports.

[Joseph S. Myers]

On Tue, 29 Apr 2014, Carlos O'Donell wrote:

> Joseph,
> 
> The hppa port is now in libc.
> 
> The disassembly of the shared libraries appears identical.

Good ... since I was a bit concerned about any possible effects from the 
removal of trailing whitespace in the long-double-fcts setting (see 
<https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-ports/2013-06/msg00004.html> and 
<https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-ports/2013-05/msg00070.html>).

> Is there any other next step (other than fixing 
> up more of the hppa port)?

Well, removing ports/README, leaving the directory containing just 
ChangeLog files.  But, yes, fixing all the hppa issues from 
<https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/PortStatus> (all of which except the 
bits needing checking against the ABIs of old binaries should be very 
quick to fix).

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com

Re: The hppa port is now moved out of ports.

[Carlos O'Donell]

On 04/29/2014 11:20 AM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Apr 2014, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> 
>> Joseph,
>>
>> The hppa port is now in libc.
>>
>> The disassembly of the shared libraries appears identical.
> 
> Good ... since I was a bit concerned about any possible effects from the 
> removal of trailing whitespace in the long-double-fcts setting (see 
> <https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-ports/2013-06/msg00004.html> and 
> <https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-ports/2013-05/msg00070.html>).

The disassembly is identical given some local patches I still have
and still get applied to gentoo and debian.

In practice it only matters that long-double-fcts is equal to exactly
"yes", but "no" or "no " is never used anywhere to make lists of
functions or ojbects or anything of that nature.
 
>> Is there any other next step (other than fixing 
>> up more of the hppa port)?
> 
> Well, removing ports/README, leaving the directory containing just 
> ChangeLog files.  But, yes, fixing all the hppa issues from 
> <https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/PortStatus> (all of which except the 
> bits needing checking against the ABIs of old binaries should be very 
> quick to fix).

Done. I've removed README, and updated all ChangeLog.* for machines
which were moved to libc proper with the normal header you were
using. I've carried out the final update to ports/ChangeLog to
indicate README is removed and ports is no longer in use.

Please feel free to add stronger wording or another README that
says "Not in use." I think we're done with the source tree.

I have updated the website to say:

* New port discussions should be on libc-alpha.

* Use libc-ports to highlight cross-port issues so maintainers
  need not pay close attention to libc-alpha.

* After the 2.19 release the ports add-on was merged back into
  core project and is no longer used.

Cheers,
Carlos.
 

Re: The hppa port is now moved out of ports.

[Joseph S. Myers]

On Tue, 29 Apr 2014, Carlos O'Donell wrote:

> * Use libc-ports to highlight cross-port issues so maintainers
>   need not pay close attention to libc-alpha.

I thought the conclusion was not to do that (that I was the only person 
suggesting repurposing libc-ports like that), but developers not updating 
all ports have the responsibility to draw attention to that fact and 
update <https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/PortStatus> when checking in the 
patch that only updates some ports.

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com

Re: The hppa port is now moved out of ports.

[Carlos O'Donell]

On 04/29/2014 05:46 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Apr 2014, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> 
>> * Use libc-ports to highlight cross-port issues so maintainers
>>   need not pay close attention to libc-alpha.
> 
> I thought the conclusion was not to do that (that I was the only person 
> suggesting repurposing libc-ports like that), but developers not updating 
> all ports have the responsibility to draw attention to that fact and 
> update <https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/PortStatus> when checking in the 
> patch that only updates some ports.

So what did we decide we were going to do with libc-ports?

Once I answer that question I can go back and update the website
with the correct information.

Cheers,
Carlos.


 

Re: The hppa port is now moved out of ports.

[Joseph S. Myers]

On Tue, 29 Apr 2014, Carlos O'Donell wrote:

> On 04/29/2014 05:46 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> > On Tue, 29 Apr 2014, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> > 
> >> * Use libc-ports to highlight cross-port issues so maintainers
> >>   need not pay close attention to libc-alpha.
> > 
> > I thought the conclusion was not to do that (that I was the only person 
> > suggesting repurposing libc-ports like that), but developers not updating 
> > all ports have the responsibility to draw attention to that fact and 
> > update <https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/PortStatus> when checking in the 
> > patch that only updates some ports.
> 
> So what did we decide we were going to do with libc-ports?

I believe we decided to stop using libc-ports altogether.

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com

Re: The hppa port is now moved out of ports.

[Carlos O'Donell]

On 04/29/2014 06:07 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Apr 2014, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> 
>> On 04/29/2014 05:46 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
>>> On Tue, 29 Apr 2014, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
>>>
>>>> * Use libc-ports to highlight cross-port issues so maintainers
>>>>   need not pay close attention to libc-alpha.
>>>
>>> I thought the conclusion was not to do that (that I was the only person 
>>> suggesting repurposing libc-ports like that), but developers not updating 
>>> all ports have the responsibility to draw attention to that fact and 
>>> update <https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/PortStatus> when checking in the 
>>> patch that only updates some ports.
>>
>> So what did we decide we were going to do with libc-ports?
> 
> I believe we decided to stop using libc-ports altogether.

You have a better memory than I so I trust that.

The website has been updated to reflect this.

Thanks for the review.

Cheers,
Carlos.

Re: The hppa port is now moved out of ports.

[Roland McGrath]

I've added some deprecation header text to the ports/ChangeLog* files that
lacked it.  I've then moved ports/ChangeLog* to ChangeLog.old-ports* so
that there is no longer a ports/ subdirectory at all.  Huzzah.

I think we should now discontinue use of the libc-ports mailing list.
The mailing list configuration should be left around at least as much
as is required to keep the archives accessible on the web.  Beyond
that, I think we should now ask overseers to change it either so that
mailing libc-ports bounces or so that libc-ports just redirects to
libc-alpha.  Objections?


Thanks,
Roland

Re: The hppa port is now moved out of ports.

[Carlos O'Donell]

On 04/30/2014 01:44 PM, Roland McGrath wrote:
> I've added some deprecation header text to the ports/ChangeLog* files that
> lacked it.  I've then moved ports/ChangeLog* to ChangeLog.old-ports* so
> that there is no longer a ports/ subdirectory at all.  Huzzah.
> 
> I think we should now discontinue use of the libc-ports mailing list.
> The mailing list configuration should be left around at least as much
> as is required to keep the archives accessible on the web.  Beyond
> that, I think we should now ask overseers to change it either so that
> mailing libc-ports bounces or so that libc-ports just redirects to
> libc-alpha.  Objections?

No objections from me.

The website is already updated to indicate libc-ports is now historical
like libc-hacker.

Cheers,
Carlos.