Removal of VAX/VMS support
Nick Clifton
nickc@redhat.com
Fri Aug 1 08:36:00 GMT 2003
Hi Guys,
From following the discussion on this topic I think that two
points arise:
* We need a mechanism to mark ports as obsolete and then remove
them.
Hence I am going to check in my patch to config.bfd. I will
just put the vax-vms port in the obsolete list for now.
* We need a policy for deciding when ports should be marked as
obsolete and when they should be removed.
There appears to be two approaches - active removal and passive
removal. With active removal we mark a port as obsolete
whenever it no longer has a maintainer. With passive removal
you wait until a port is reported as not working by somebody on
the list and then nobody offers to fix the problem.
With both approaches I think that the right thing to do is to
first mark the port as obsolete but not to delete it until after
the next major release. Thus giving someone a chance to come
forward and offer to maintain the port.
For now I think that we should go with the passive approach.
There are lots of binutils ports which do not currently have a
maintainer but which nevertheless still work, and presumably,
are still being used. I think that deleting them would be a
mistake.
If someone feels that a particular port should be marked as
obsolete then they should post to the list, explaining why.
Cheers
Nick
bfd/ChangeLog
2003-08-01 Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com>
* config.bfd: Add code to catch obsolete configurations and warn
about them unless --enable-obsolete is used. Use this to mark
vax-vms port as obsolete.
More information about the Binutils
mailing list