Re: Remove devel/arm-elf?
Christian Weisgerber writes: > Grepping the ports tree for uses of /usr/bin/gcc turned up > devel/arm-elf/gcc. That port has been marked BROKEN "due to frequent > segfaults during build" for 4.5 years. I guess nobody has missed > it since. > > I was going to suggest that we remove the port, but it's part of > four related ones: > > devel/arm-elf/binutils > devel/arm-elf/gcc > devel/arm-elf/gdb > devel/arm-elf/newlib > > newlib depends on gcc, so it will have to go too if gcc goes. > binutils and gdb are independent of gcc, and in fact we have packages > for them. But are they any use on their own? > > The ports were imported in 2007, once updated in 2010, the maintainer > asked to be removed in 2012, and otherwise the changes have been > mostly infrastructure churn. > > Can we delete all of devel/arm-elf? Yes? No? > What's the use of an "arm-elf" cross-tools suite? I used to program Olimex boards with those ports. But that was nearly ten years ago. We have many cross-compilers in the tree. It should be easy enough for someone who needs it to send a diff based on the working ones. A port broken this long doesn't need to stay. ok bentley@
Re: Remove devel/arm-elf?
On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 04:29:03PM +0200, Christian Weisgerber wrote: > Grepping the ports tree for uses of /usr/bin/gcc turned up > devel/arm-elf/gcc. That port has been marked BROKEN "due to frequent > segfaults during build" for 4.5 years. I guess nobody has missed > it since. > > I was going to suggest that we remove the port, but it's part of > four related ones: > > devel/arm-elf/binutils > devel/arm-elf/gcc > devel/arm-elf/gdb > devel/arm-elf/newlib > > newlib depends on gcc, so it will have to go too if gcc goes. > binutils and gdb are independent of gcc, and in fact we have packages > for them. But are they any use on their own? > > The ports were imported in 2007, once updated in 2010, the maintainer > asked to be removed in 2012, and otherwise the changes have been > mostly infrastructure churn. > > Can we delete all of devel/arm-elf? Yes? No? I think they can all be removed. We have devel/arm-none-eabi and ports clang has support for multiple targets in a single binary (including arm). > What's the use of an "arm-elf" cross-tools suite? I imagine it is for the older abi (aapcs). The ports were originally for writing code for microcontrollers but people use eabi with those as well now.
Re: Remove devel/arm-elf?
On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 04:29:03PM +0200, Christian Weisgerber wrote: > Can we delete all of devel/arm-elf? Yes? No? > What's the use of an "arm-elf" cross-tools suite? jca wanted to to the same in december 2017 and I had been the only one replying that I used some of it - but this is long over and I do not use any that. https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports=15131919915=2 Feel free to kill it with OK kn; I doubt someone will object by now.
Remove devel/arm-elf?
Grepping the ports tree for uses of /usr/bin/gcc turned up devel/arm-elf/gcc. That port has been marked BROKEN "due to frequent segfaults during build" for 4.5 years. I guess nobody has missed it since. I was going to suggest that we remove the port, but it's part of four related ones: devel/arm-elf/binutils devel/arm-elf/gcc devel/arm-elf/gdb devel/arm-elf/newlib newlib depends on gcc, so it will have to go too if gcc goes. binutils and gdb are independent of gcc, and in fact we have packages for them. But are they any use on their own? The ports were imported in 2007, once updated in 2010, the maintainer asked to be removed in 2012, and otherwise the changes have been mostly infrastructure churn. Can we delete all of devel/arm-elf? Yes? No? What's the use of an "arm-elf" cross-tools suite? -- Christian "naddy" Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de
