This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: obseleting VMS ports?


On Mon, May 27, 2002 at 06:15:23PM +0100, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Mon, 27 May 2002, Richard Kenner wrote:
> 
> >     I'd like to suggest that all the *-*-vms* targets be obseleted, unless
> >     people can provide accurate reports that they have 3.x-series gcc
> >     running and working for a particular target, and that they're
> >     actually using it.
> > 
> > Alpha/VMS is being very heavily worked on by Doug Rupp at ACT.  It is
> > working quite well.  ACT has a contract with Compaq (now HP) to port
> > GNAT (including GCC) to IA64/VMS.
> 
> The VMS documentation (vms.texi, install-old.texi (if the VMS docs in
> there are obsolete, they should be removed, and current VMS install
> documentation put in install.texi), gcc.hlp) has shown little sign of this
> work.
This is an important point.  I hope whoever's working on Alpha/VMS and
IA64/VMS could do this soon.  If we can get verification of which of the
old vms-specific things are still useful/accurate and which aren't,
that would be good too.  If VMS support is 'working well' but isn't in
CVS or isn't documented correctly, then I don't see that it should be
officially supported; if it's in current CVS and is well-documented,
then we should certainly support it.

> Should VAX/VMS be obsoleted as a host or target?

I'd say both: I haven't heard of anyone using GCC on VAX/VMS in a long
time.  (Please consider this a request for anyone using GCC 3.1
successfuly on VAX/VMS to speak up.)

--Nathanael


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]