[Bug bootstrap/12025] combined build of i960 coff fails

["wilson at tuliptree dot org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>]

PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12025



------- Additional Comments From wilson at tuliptree dot org  2003-10-21 00:47 -------
Subject: Re:  combined build of i960 coff fails

On Fri, 2003-10-17 at 20:18, dhazeghi at yahoo dot com wrote:
> If the i960 port really is dead, why don't we deprecate it in 3.4 (or even remove it)? As for those 
> who claim they need it, they can always keep the current source. I just don't see the point in 
> keeping something nonbuildable and unmaintained in the tree. What you think?

I have recommended it for deprecation every time the subject has come
up.  So far, I haven't been successful.  We have mainly been doing non
controversial deprecations, e.g. if anyone claims they need a port, we
don't deprecate it.  Every time I've tried to get the i960 port
deprecated, someone has claimed that they needed it.  No one has ever
stepped forward to help fix bugs in it though, and I haven't seen any
evidence that anyone is actually trying to use it.  Eventually, the
stalemate will be broken, but for now, it remains an unmaintained and
often unbuildable port.