This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GCC 4.3 target deprecation proposals
- From: NightStrike <nightstrike at gmail dot com>
- To: "John David Anglin" <dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca>
- Cc: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, liqin at sunnorth dot com dot cn, dave dot anglin at nrc dot ca, matt at 3am-software dot com, joern dot rennecke at arc dot com, m dot hayes at elec dot canterbury dot ac dot nz, nickc at redhat dot com, aldyh at redhat dot com, nathan at codesourcery dot com, ni1d at arrl dot net, geoffk at geoffk dot org, paul dot woegerer at nsc dot com
- Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 04:06:17 -0500
- Subject: Re: GCC 4.3 target deprecation proposals
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0801211859440.11050@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <200801212005.m0LK55vR020709@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca>
On 1/21/08, John David Anglin <dave@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> wrote:
> > The following target architectures have seen no test results posted in
> > the past year: arc, c4x (as listed above), crx, iq2000, mt, pdp11,
> > score, stormy16, vax.
>
> Regarding vax, I don't have the time to maintain it. HPPA has taken
> all my free time in the past year. I probably should remove my name
> as a vax maintainer.
>
> There is still a small amount of vax related activity but I don't
> expect the GCC port to be actively maintained. The community is too
> small. So, I think it is reasonable to consider it for removal.
> I recall in the last go around that some people thought it should
> be maintained as an example.
I work for a company that makes significant use of gcc to target vax.
The people involved are users, not developers, of gcc. Does any part
of the deprecation requirements take into account user base, or just
developer base?