Cleanups for the m68k backend

[Bernardo Innocenti]

On Wednesday 09 July 2003 00:37, Marc Espie wrote:

 > These days, NetBSD builds most of its arches using cross-compilation.
 > OpenBSD development insists on native compilation. For starters, it
 > has found bugs, and helps keep old targets alive by making sure they
 > can at least run through a make build.
 > So, we don't have a complete cross-compilation framework, and it's not
 > seen as a priority.

 Last time I installed NetBSD 1.5 on the Amiga, the build was completely
self-hosted.

 So I guess cross-compiling is just an option added lately to NetBSD
for people who aren't willing to wait 8 hours just for building the
kernel as I did too many times.

 > [...very detailed explanation of the current situation...]
 >
 > If you haven't already, shake out the misconception that OpenBSD is
 > just NetBSD plus a few security changes. That hasn't been true for the
 > last five years or so. NetBSD and OpenBSD are distinct systems that
 > share a common ancestor and still do some cross-fertilization.

 I see. Actually, my assumption was based on how things were at the time
I was an active NetBSD developer, and that's 4-5 years ago.

 Just one question: In OpenBSD's CVS repository I see no version of
gcc later than gcc 2.95.3. Is it ok to presume that you won't be upgrading
the system compiler to gcc 3.4 without also importing a newer version of
binutils?

 If it's so, then OpenBSD is not a show-stopper for the decision to drop
the MIT syntax.

-- 
  // Bernardo Innocenti - Develer S.r.l., R&D dept.
\X/  http://www.develer.com/

Please don't send Word attachments - http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html