> On 31. Mar 2023, at 16:58, Rebecca Cran <rebe...@bsdio.com> wrote: > > On 3/31/23 2:29 AM, Marvin Häuser wrote: >> I agree if there’s an actual plan on doing that. We depend on XCODE5 >> downstream, but I think it would literally be easier for us if the upstream >> version was dropped than rebasing against hacks that our slightly modded >> variant does not require. >> >> Cc Andrew and Rebecca. I don’t know anyone else who might still be using >> XCODE5. Any objections to dropping it? If so, any plans to pick up my >> proposed changes instead? > > I've only been using XCODE5 to test if it still works. I do all of my > development work on Linux or FreeBSD.
I checked the list and most of the traffic regarding XCODE5 is basically Andrew and you. So if you don't need this toolchain... @Andrew Would you agree it's fair for Apple to maintain XCODE5 and its oddities downstream? I know someone mentioned the ARM transition, but I think you still support UEFI for HV things, don't you? The alternative would be we revamp the upstream XCODE5 toolchain and mtoc with our changes from AUDK and ocmtoc, but this isn't feasible without strong support from Apple (our previous patches to mtoc were ignored). I don't think the burden easily fixable XCODE5 oddities put on the general codebase are acceptable going forward. Thanks! Best regards, Marvin > > > -- > > Rebecca Cran > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#102320): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/102320 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/97960758/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
