This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Deprecating Itanium1 for GCC 4.4
- From: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald at pfeifer dot com>
- To: Steven Bosscher <stevenb dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Jim Wilson <wilson at tuliptree dot org>, sje at cup dot hp dot com, "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2009 21:39:40 +0100 (CET)
- Subject: Re: Deprecating Itanium1 for GCC 4.4
- References: <571f6b510903150916qa6ec3a4o6a85c09698ee0bb@mail.gmail.com>
On Sun, 15 Mar 2009, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> I doubt there are many Itanium 1 machines left in use (production or
> even for hobbyists). The only Itanium1 that reached the market was the
> Merced, AFAIK. But only a few 1000s of these were sold, in 2000/2001.
> Most of them are probably not running anymore, and the ones still
> working probably don't run ia64-linux so they don't need GCC.
Itanium 1 is less than marginal as far as Itanium goes. For example,
a quick check indicates that both SLES 9 (released in summer 2004)
and RHEL 4 (released half a year later) have Itanium 2 as the minimum
requirement.
I have a hard time seeing anyone use this in production, and given
the large engery and space consumption most of these machines had,
even hobbiest use.
In any case, we should not hobble GCC for the sake of one or two
hobbyists...
> I can't find any test results in gcc-testresults reported with
> -mtune=itanium1 [1].
...especially if theye do not even contribute test results or
feedback when things are broken (as in this case). Deprecating
Itanium 1 with GCC 4.4 sounds very reasonable.
Gerald