This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [patch] purge obseleted configurations, top level
> OK. I sent this in on the advice that if I couldn't find any
> references to these being particularly supported as binutils-only
> targets, I could assume they weren't. Now I have that information.
I didn't say there were people actively supporting them. I said they
were supported by binutils. By that, I meant that their configure
scripts have entries for those targets. When all the projects have
purged themselves of these targets, then I'd feel safe removing them
from the toplevel files.
> Incidentally, these are now very unlucky little targets,
Yup.
> > > - arm-*-riscix*)
> -- no ld.
The support files are still there, though. It might use generic
support logic to find them.
> > > - m68k-apollo-*)
> -- no ld, 'binutils', gprof, libgloss
It may use the generic m68k support for those.
> > > - mips*-dec-bsd*)
> -- no gprof, libgloss
> > > - mips*-*-bsd*)
> -- no gprof, libgloss
Not needed - bsd is a hosted system.
> > > romp-*-*)
> -- no bfd, 'binutils', ld, gas, opcodes, or libgloss (!)
> > > + # should be deleted after GCC 3.2 unless support is reenabled
>
> Romp seems genuinely unsupported; am I right about this one?
Not quite entirely:
gcc/config.gcc: | romp-*-openbsd* \
gcc/config.gcc:romp-*-openbsd*)
ld/configure.host:romp-*-*)
opcodes/configure: bfd_romp_arch) ;;
opcodes/configure.in: bfd_romp_arch) ;;
gcc/config/romp/
gdb/config/romp/