This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Target deprecation, round three
On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 02:48:23PM -0800, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-02-24 at 13:36, David Edelsohn wrote:
> > >>>>> Zack Weinberg writes:
> >
> > Zack> It turns out that only a small part of the i370 back end is dependent
> > Zack> on HOST_EBCDIC. I would be willing to compromise at the removal of
> > Zack> all support for this mode, leaving the rest of the back end intact.
> > Zack> However, I think that the demonstrated lack of interest in maintaining
> > Zack> the port in the FSF repository is still a strong argument for
> > Zack> obsoleting this entire back end.
> >
> > The main use of the i370 port is z/OS Unix System Services, which
> > is an EBCDIC environment. If GCC cannot be hosted in an EBCDIC
> > environment, the i370 port is much less useful, so your compromise is not
> > much of a compromise at all.
> >
> > David
>
> I think that i370 is clearly useful to people and should be supported.
>
> The question is how to do that. Ideally, I agree with Zack that it
> should be merged with the s390 backend; the architectures are similar
> enough that they should be one backend.
>
> However, I don't think we can deprecate i370 to try to force that issue;
> we have to hope that someone will actually go it. And if they did do
> it, I think we'd still have the EBCDIC issue -- that's part of the OS.
>
> How exactly does the EBCDIC stuff interact with the multi-charset stuff?
I'm concerned that we're keeping support for the i370 based on some
work David says Red Hat has done on the port, which is not in the tree.
I seem to recall messages to the effect of "the i370 port in FSF GCC
does not work, but there's this code in Red Hat somewhere that does";
my apologies if I'm misinterpreting someone.
If that's right I don't think we should be talking about preserving the
current i370 port unless that work is contributed.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer