On 16-01-23 08:34 PM, Ted Unangst wrote:
I will add that one of the reasons we have support for all these museum pieces is that people can build their very own museum and run something interesting on it. But running on emulators doesn't really satisfy that goal. If there are, in fact, no museum pieces left in the world, we no longer need to supply an OS to run on them.
Huh. Previous discussions had led me to believe that the OpenBSD project's rationale for supporting all these various architectures was that it ultimately resulted in much-higher-quality code because platforms like VAX and SPARC64 acted as canaries for suboptimal coding practices? (Endian issues, stack issues, framing issues, alignment issues, etc., etc., etc.)
Besides, I thought the run-on-everything-and-anything (including the verging-on-absurd) was NetBSD's thing, not OpenBSD's? See http://netbsd.org/ports/, make your own opinions on which platforms verge on the absurd...
-Adam
