Re: What should we do with rs6000?

[Andrew Cagney <cagney at gnu dot org>]

> > > Do I understand correctly that you're saying that we should remove
> > > > >xm-rs6000.h as well?
> >
> > > Yep.  The infrastructure is going.
>
>
> Hmm, sorry, my fault. Can I ask again, just to make sure I am not
> misinterpreting you: This is a configuration I can not test - we
> should be able to remove blindly these xm­ files without breaking
> anything, but since I can't test them, it may break. Should we go
> ahead now anyway?

Correct.  We can't reasonably require you or anyone else to test on such 
extremely old configurations.  Instead we go with the working assumption 
that the new code is sufficient to replace the old.

Andrew