From owner-freebsd-toolchain@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 1 18:04:02 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: toolchain@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A76325F; Sun, 1 Sep 2013 18:04:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: from mail.soaustin.net (pancho.soaustin.net [76.74.250.40]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 288C72C43; Sun, 1 Sep 2013 18:04:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id F18225606D; Sun, 1 Sep 2013 13:03:50 -0500 (CDT) Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2013 13:03:50 -0500 From: Mark Linimon To: John Baldwin Subject: Re: GCC withdraw Message-ID: <20130901180350.GA12351@lonesome.com> References: <20130822200902.GG94127@funkthat.com> <201308291344.25562.jhb@freebsd.org> <201308301041.18874.jhb@freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201308301041.18874.jhb@freebsd.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: "Sam Fourman Jr." , Boris Samorodov , FreeBSD Current , toolchain@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Maintenance of FreeBSD's integrated toolchain List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 Sep 2013 18:04:02 -0000 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 fwiw, unlike alpha, which was withdrawn because it had ceased to function, sparc64 and ia64 work and have active developer(s), so I don't think it would be entirely fair to cite its removal as a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