Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2013 13:03:50 -0500 From: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: "Sam Fourman Jr." <sfourman@gmail.com>, Boris Samorodov <bsam@passap.ru>, FreeBSD Current <current@freebsd.org>, toolchain@freebsd.org Subject: Re: GCC withdraw Message-ID: <20130901180350.GA12351@lonesome.com> In-Reply-To: <201308301041.18874.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <20130822200902.GG94127@funkthat.com> <201308291344.25562.jhb@freebsd.org> <A981C965-D625-458B-B0AB-171C983AEA42@FreeBSD.org> <201308301041.18874.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 10:41:18AM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: > So my take away from this is that you have no plans to support any platform > that doesn't support clang as you just expect ia64 and sparc64 to die and > not be present in 11.0. That may be the best path, but I've certainly not > seen that goal discussed publically. If this is the case, IMHO: - it's a decision to be made by the project as a whole, not just one individual; - if the decision is made, there should be one major release cycle before it's done; - our userbase (admittedly small) should have a heads-up that they will have to migrate after that timeframe. fwiw, unlike alpha, which was withdrawn because it had ceased to function, sparc64 and ia64 work and have active developer(s), so I don't think it would be entirely fair to cite its removal as a precedent. tl;dr: just because you don't use these boxes doesn't mean others don't. mcl
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20130901180350.GA12351>