Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2002 09:05:00 -0400 (EDT) From: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> To: Richard Tobin <richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> Cc: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.ORG>, Juli Mallett <jmallett@FreeBSD.ORG>, Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>, current@FreeBSD.ORG, Bakul Shah <bakul@bitblocks.com> Subject: Re: aout support broken in gcc3 Message-ID: <XFMail.20020904090500.jhb@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <200209040845.JAA16132@rhymer.cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 04-Sep-2002 Richard Tobin wrote: >> You are blowing this out of proportion and not actually reading >> what people are proposing. So far, the comments are about >> removing a.out support from the base compiler and offering >> a.out binutils and gcc _as ports_. > > That would be sufficient for my needs (a matching gdb would be useful > too, I'm not sure if that is part of binutils). > > But I don't think my concern was misplaced: having gone back through > the thread for the past couple of weeks, there were certainly phrases > like > > "drop all traces of a.out support" > "if you need to generate new ones (?) unpack a 2.2.6 system" > > with the ports solution mentioned only "if we really have to have a.out". Well, I think what happened is that people wanted to know if others still needed a.out and thus if ports should be created. I guess some people have been saying some more drastic things then that and it is hard to know who to listen to. :-/ It is a good thing to point out user's needs but accusing developers of never taking the long-term view (which you did not do, I know) is not a good way to win others over to one's argument. -- John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?XFMail.20020904090500.jhb>