This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.org
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: target removal
On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 01:31:22AM +0200, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> > Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 08:29:16 +0930
> > From: Alan Modra <amodra@gmail.com>
>
> > Hi Hans-Peter,
>
> Hi!
>
> > I'm going through the targets obsoleted a long time ago, and removing
> > support. i860, i960, bout and adobe have already disappeared, and I
> > have local patches to remove tahoe, i370, netware, newsos3 and
> > tandem. The next on my list was ieee, but I see you include ieee_vec
> > for cris. That's going to disappear. Objections?
>
> Nope. IIRC it was included only because it seemed like a good
> idea at the time, but I haven't heard of it being used in
> practice.
Thanks for the quick reply.
> JFTR, I'm *not* answering regarding whether it's a good idea to
> remove "support for ieee" (and I didn't bother to verify the
> "face value" of that), just the connection to CRIS sub-targets.
Heh. Well the idea is to remove include/ieee.h, bfd/ieee.c,
bfd/libieee.h, binutils/ieee.c, gas/config/atof-ieee.c not just the
configuration. ie. I'll be removing support for the IEEE 695 object
format, a format that didn't gain wide acceptance and as far as I'm
aware is virtually dead nowadays. That means less files to edit on
global BFD changes, reducing the maintenance burden a little. Plus
it's quite likely that someone wanting to play with retro systems
using IEEE 695 is better off using retro binutils. There's a high
likelihood the IEEE 695 support has bitrotted.
--
Alan Modra
Australia Development Lab, IBM