> "Nathanael" == Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Nathanael> Paul Koning wrote:
>>> "Nathanael" == Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> writes:
>>
Nathanael> * pdp11-*-* (generic only) Useless generic.
>> I believe this one generates DEC (as opposed to BSD) callin
Paul Koning wrote:
>>"Nathanael" == Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
> Nathanael> * pdp11-*-* (generic only) Useless generic.
>
> I believe this one generates DEC (as opposed to BSD) calling
> conventions, so I'd rather keep it around. It also generates .s files
> that can
On Sun, Jun 05, 2005 at 12:41:43PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> * alpha*-*-unicosmk*
> No real update since 2002. If rth, the lone alpha maintainer, is actually
> maintaining it, I guess it should stay; it's not in bad shape. But does
> it really need fixproto?
This port was done by Ro
On Sun, 2005-06-05 at 12:41 -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> * hppa1.1-*-bsd*
I'm 99.9% sure this can go -- in fact, I just recently found out that
the previous single largest installation of PA BSD boxes recently shut
off its last PA.
jeff
> "Nathanael" == Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Nathanael> * pdp11-*-* (generic only) Useless generic.
I believe this one generates DEC (as opposed to BSD) calling
conventions, so I'd rather keep it around. It also generates .s files
that can (modulo a few bugfixes I need to g
Nathanael Nerode wrote:
I seem to remember asking about this some years ago, and finding out
that its existence was not documented anywhere public, which it still
isn't. It's also odd that a VxWorks simulation environment is
sufficiently different from VxWorks that it needs a different configur
Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> On Sun, 2005-06-05 12:41:43 -0400, Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>>* vax-*-bsd*
>>* vax-*-sysv*
>> If anyone is still using these, GCC probably doesn't run already. I
>> certainly haven't seen any test results. Correct me if I'm wrong!
>> And afte
Mark Mitchell wrote:
> Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Jun 05, 2005 at 12:41:43PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
>>
>>> * mips-wrs-windiss
>>> * powerpc-wrs-windiss
>>> I don't think these were supposed to be in the FSF tree at all, were
>>> they?
>>
>>
>>
>> This question belongs more in t
Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Sun, Jun 05, 2005 at 12:41:43PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
* mips-wrs-windiss
* powerpc-wrs-windiss
I don't think these were supposed to be in the FSF tree at all, were they?
This question belongs more in this thread than in the fixproto one so
I'll reask it:
On Sun, Jun 05, 2005 at 12:41:43PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> * mips-wrs-windiss
> * powerpc-wrs-windiss
> I don't think these were supposed to be in the FSF tree at all, were they?
This question belongs more in this thread than in the fixproto one so
I'll reask it: Why do you think this?
On Sun, 2005-06-05 12:41:43 -0400, Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * vax-*-bsd*
> * vax-*-sysv*
> If anyone is still using these, GCC probably doesn't run already. I
> certainly haven't seen any test results. Correct me if I'm wrong!
> And after some staring, I think these ar
OK, here's my proposed obsoletion list.
* arc-*-elf* (only arc port)
No maintainer. Still.
* alpha*-*-unicosmk*
No real update since 2002. If rth, the lone alpha maintainer, is actually
maintaining it, I guess it should stay; it's not in bad shape. But does
it really need fixproto?
*
12 matches
Mail list logo
