Re: gcc: cleaning up top level config

[Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>]

Alex Rosenberg <alexr@spies.com> writes:
>
> I submitted a patch and there was a collective yawn.
>
> <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2001-12/msg01444.html>

The volume of patches is very high.  It's a good idea to resubmit
patches that don't get any reaction, at weekly to monthly intervals.

> Think about this for a second: "I don't have an x86 GNU/Linux
> box. Therefore I propose that it should be deprecated as soon as
> possible." Does that upset you? Good. I'm upset that here we are a
> year after I submitted a patch to fix things and without even
> exploring the contents of the patch you're once again proposing to
> remove the code.

Supporting MPW, unlike x86 Linux or any other relatively modern
Unix-like operating system, places substantial burdens on all the
maintainers of GCC, whether or not they have ever seen it.  This is
because its structure is so very different.  We have to weigh this
burden against the perceived utility of keeping MPW support around.
When you are the only person who has asked for it to be preserved,
the utility is pretty low indeed.

It seems to me that you and other enthusiasts might be better served
by maintaining MPW support (and classic MacOS target support)
separately from the FSF source tree.  If you don't try to track the
development sources -- and I don't see why you would want to -- this
should not be hard.  We'd be happy to provide a hyperlink to your
project from the GCC webpages.

zw