This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Should we remove remnants of UWIN support in gcc/config.* files?
- From: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: FX <fxcoudert at gmail dot com>
- Cc: GCC Development <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, gcc-patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2015 21:10:02 +0000
- Subject: Re: Should we remove remnants of UWIN support in gcc/config.* files?
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <168AA6F2-01C4-4B57-A7F3-EE15001B7B30 at gmail dot com>
On Thu, 20 Aug 2015, FX wrote:
> PS: gcc/config.host and gcc/config.build include some other such
> targetsâ without checking them all, I think the following could be
> removed:
>
> powerpc-*-beos
> i370-*-opened* | i370-*-mvs*
> i386-*-vsta
> i[34567]86-*-udk*
> i[34567]86-*-sysv4*
> i[34567]86-sequent-ptx4* | i[34567]86-sequent-sysv4*
> i[34567]86-*-sco3.2v5*
>
> Is there a good reason for not removing those targets? If not, Iâll try
> to track them down, check that they are indeed unsupported, and propose
> a patch removing them.
Well, they aren't *targets*, but *host* and *build* systems. However, I
don't think any of them are actually significantly relevant to GCC now as
host or build systems (and nor do I think we need case statements for
unsupported host or build systems - just let people try to build and
possibly have the build fail, a fix for such a failure would better use
autoconf than special-casing a triplet anyway).
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com