On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Bruce Evans wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Sep 2002, Peter Wemm wrote:
> > Bruce Evans wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2 Sep 2002, Jake Burkholder wrote:
> > >
> > > > Apparently, On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 02:24:08PM +1000,
> > > > Bruce Evans said words to the effect of;
> > > >
> > > > > aout support is still required for a few things (mainly for compiling
> > > > > some boot blocks), but is broken in gcc3 for at least compile-time
> > > >
> > > > Which boot blocks?
> > >
> > > Oops, perhaps only mine. (I use my version of biosboot which is like
> > > pc98/boot2 except it supports loading elf kernels and some local things,
> > > and it hasn't been converted to elf at the source level.) When I wrote
> > > ...
> > I've been of the opinion for a while that it is well past time to remove
> > the hybrid a.out/ELF support in the compiler and stop pretending that we
> > support a.out. All it does these days is slow down the compiler in the
> > usual case by pushing what are traditional compile-time decisions to
> > runtime. As you point out, it hasn't worked for a while.
> Except I just used it to compile biosboot :-). (I had more problems with
> ufs2 changes than with the compiler.)
> Actually, I agree. Not having a clean break in FreeBSD-3 was very expensive.
> Support for running aout binaries and compatibility cruft to support old
> binaries should have been dropped too.
I thought it was part of the plan to drop all traces of a.out support in
5.x. Am I wrong?
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message