On 24.04.2017 12:12, Peter Maydell wrote: > Upstream we're definitely going to drop SunOS/Solaris support unless > somebody provides us with a machine we can do build/test on. > DragonFly BSD is in my "let's see if anybody complains" list. > OpenBSD is also in this "let's see" list but it seems more plausible > that somebody will complain (and I have a VM setup for it; it > doesn't pass 'make check' at the moment so the first step there > will be for somebody to investigate and send fixes.) > > The motivation here is that we would rather like to get rid of > things like #ifdef __NetBSD__ in our sources (in favour of doing > checks in configure for presence/absence of particular functions > and acting accordingly), and also avoid using "uname" to figure > out our compile target. That's very likely to break platforms > we can't test on, so the idea is to identify which platforms > people do care about, and make sure we are testing them, and > then not worry about breaking anything that we aren't testing. > > Also I think it doesn't do our users any favours to claim to > support platform Foo if in fact it doesn't even compile. >
I can only speak for pkgsrc, qemu/Illumos (SmartOS) is actively maintained. I have got an access to an Illumos machine for pkgsrc developers. Once I will sort out NetBSD issues I will test qemu over there. I cannot speak for Oracle Solaris and other proprietary Operating Systems. I should get shell account for myself for DragonFly and Minix within 2 months. I cannot maintain non-NetBSD targets beyond occasional and trivial patches thought. I will keep upstreaming small chunks of patches for NetBSD and let's see how it will go. Thanks for help!
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
