Mark Morgan Lloyd <markmll.fpc-de...@telemetry.co.uk> wrote the following on 09/02/12 14:08:24:
> I feel I have to respond to this after a couple of things I've read over > the last day or so. I for one have never attempted to belittle "big > iron", since it has always seemed clear to me that that type of kit has > its uses: if nothing else then to do things like running the name and > certificate servers that keep distributed systems going. It's also worth > noting that IBM and Burroughs did engage in controlled decentralisation > quite early, putting a significant amount of "smarts" in their terminals > well in advance of anything done by their "trendier" competitors such as > DEC. IBM earned over $15 billion last year from the sale of mainframes. > In the current case I was relying on the precedent set by the GCC > porters and the Linux maintainers to say "OK, we need to have some > policy to determine what vintage of hardware is supported". However > noting the availability of old IBM operating systems and the interest > people have in running them, and in particular noting the amount of work > being put into the OS/380 project, I'm fairly rapidly coming to the > conclusion that the S/370 is worth supporting, even if we brush the > S/360 under the carpet. To an application programmer there is (was?) little difference between 360 and 370. I'm puzzled by this whole idea of Free Pascal supporting 360/370. Who is it aimed at? Who needs it? _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
