> What's different is that there is a well-maintained arm-eabi port. The > arm-elf port and all its legacy just gets in the way. > > The vax back-end only affects VAX; likewise for the PDP11 port.
I think that's a critical distinction. I can't see removing a port just because it's not used much (or at all) because it might be valuable for historical reason or to show examples for how to do things. If the maintenance burden of keeping that port is just doing some mechanical changes a couple of times a year when the backend API changes, that port should be kept even if there are ZERO known users. But if it's interfering with the maintenance of an active port with which it shares code, then I think it's retention has to meet a higher standard of usefulness.
