[PATCH v2] Obsolete support for Solaris < 10

[Rainer Orth]

Hi Jan,

>>> Hmm, yes, I indeed misread it. But then what's the 2.41 related sentence about?
>> 
>> It just says that even though Solaris 8/9 weren't obsoleted, they didn't
>> build for quite some time and no one noticed/complained.  This might
>> even argue for immediate removal instead of obsoletion.
>
> Oh, I see what you mean. Note that as a non-native speaker it was more
> natural (in fact automatic until I started writing this reply) to insert
> the seemingly missing "been" to make that sentence "Both haven't even
> been built since binutils 2.41." May I suggest "Both wouldn't even build
> since binutils 2.41"?

now I see what you're at.  Fixed accordingly.

>>> Also, please don't drop the null part. See the later case command about removed
>>> targets, where the null is retained despite there being a long list. Keeping it
>>> will make more obvious what it should go back to when the Solaris cases are
>>> moved to that other case command.
>> 
>> Good point.  Here's the revised patch, retested as before, description
>> and ChangeLog unchanged.
>
> Okay preferably with the small wording adjustment above.

Committed now, thanks.

	Rainer

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University