mlel...@serpens.de (Michael van Elst) writes:
jo...@britannica.bec.de (Joerg Sonnenberger) writes:
On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 11:47:01AM -0700, Dennis Ferguson wrote:
Asking for ARCNET support in the absence of hardware to test on,
however, is really asking for something quite different. Since
On 8 June 2015 at 13:18, Anders Magnusson ra...@ludd.ltu.se wrote:
David Holland skrev den 2015-06-08 19:06:
On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 04:15:15PM +0200, Anders Magnusson wrote:
printfing from the back of the front end is definitely totally wrong
in other ways that need to be rectified
Oops, s/epilogue/prologue/ in below
On 8 June 2015 at 15:15, David Holland dholland-t...@netbsd.org wrote:
On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 07:18:24PM +0200, Anders Magnusson wrote:
David Holland skrev den 2015-06-08 19:06:
On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 04:15:15PM +0200, Anders Magnusson wrote:
Andrew Cagney skrev den 2015-06-08 19:18:
I'm clearly out-of-date regarding SSA, its nice to be corrected.
No problem :-)
On 8 June 2015 at 09:06, Anders Magnusson ra...@ludd.ltu.se wrote:
Andrew Cagney skrev den 2015-06-01 20:41:
I do not understand why either of those choices need to be
On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 07:18:24PM +0200, Anders Magnusson wrote:
David Holland skrev den 2015-06-08 19:06:
On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 04:15:15PM +0200, Anders Magnusson wrote:
printfing from the back of the front end is definitely totally wrong
in other ways that need to be rectified
On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 04:15:15PM +0200, Anders Magnusson wrote:
printfing from the back of the front end is definitely totally wrong
in other ways that need to be rectified first :(
Hm, I may be missing something, but what is wrong?
Where should you print it out otherwise?
I would say
I'm clearly out-of-date regarding SSA, its nice to be corrected.
On 8 June 2015 at 09:06, Anders Magnusson ra...@ludd.ltu.se wrote:
Andrew Cagney skrev den 2015-06-01 20:41:
I do not understand why either of those choices need to be taken.
Pcc has a reasonable intermediate representation,
David Holland skrev den 2015-06-03 07:56:
PCC, to the best of my knowledge is still in the [very early] planning
stages. One of its design choices would be to go pure SSA. Another
option, closer to GCC (RTL), would be to retain existing code-gen
passes. Tough choices.
I'm not
Andrew Cagney skrev den 2015-06-01 17:41:
On 1 June 2015 at 02:15, Anders Magnusson ra...@ludd.ltu.se wrote:
Andrew Cagney skrev den 2015-06-01 03:24:
systems and generates reasonable code. Unfortunately, and sorry PCC
(stabs, really?),
Feel free to add dwarf, the source is out there, and it
Andrew Cagney skrev den 2015-06-01 22:50:
Like I mentioned in another reply, I'm being a little fast and loose.
The file cc/ccom/scan.l from
http://pcc.ludd.ltu.se/fisheye/browse/pcc/pcc/cc/ccom/scan.l?r=1.127
which I'm assuming is the C parser is doing this:
#define STABS_LINE(x) if (gflag
Andrew Cagney skrev den 2015-06-01 20:41:
On 1 June 2015 at 12:54, David Holland dholland-t...@netbsd.org wrote:
On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 11:41:38AM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
systems and generates reasonable code. Unfortunately, and sorry PCC
(stabs, really?),
Feel free to add
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 7:39 AM, Michael van Elst mlel...@serpens.de wrote:
jo...@britannica.bec.de (Joerg Sonnenberger) writes:
On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 11:47:01AM -0700, Dennis Ferguson wrote:
Asking for ARCNET support in the absence of hardware to test on,
however, is really asking for
On 3 June 2015 at 01:56, David Holland dholland-t...@netbsd.org wrote:
On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 02:41:22PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
To my mind, and I'm assuming a pure SSA compiler design, having SSA
forces issues like: [...]
I'm missing something; SSA is just a style of
On 30 May, 2015, at 16:09 , David Holland dholland-t...@netbsd.org wrote:
In these cases, keeping the extra old stuff along with its
complications during the framework rototilling usually results in a
better framework; but it makes the rototilling cost a lot more. As the
amount of manpower
At Tue, 2 Jun 2015 11:47:01 -0700, Dennis Ferguson
dennis.c.fergu...@gmail.com wrote:
Subject: Re: Removing ARCNET stuffs
It's too long an argument, but I think any approach to a
multiprocessor network stack that attempts to get there starting
with the existing network L2/L3/interface code
On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 11:47:01AM -0700, Dennis Ferguson wrote:
Asking for ARCNET support in the absence of hardware to test on,
however, is really asking for something quite different. Since you
can't make more than small, mechanical changes to anything and expect
it to work without testing
jo...@britannica.bec.de (Joerg Sonnenberger) writes:
On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 11:47:01AM -0700, Dennis Ferguson wrote:
Asking for ARCNET support in the absence of hardware to test on,
however, is really asking for something quite different. Since you
can't make more than small, mechanical
On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 11:50:24AM +0100, Justin Cormack wrote:
On 31 May 2015 at 00:09, David Holland dholland-t...@netbsd.org wrote:
I'm saying that, fundamentally, if you want to run gcc4 or gcc5 on a
Sparc IPC that you're going to have problems. There is no way around
this, except
On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 02:41:22PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
To my mind, and I'm assuming a pure SSA compiler design, having SSA
forces issues like: [...]
I'm missing something; SSA is just a style of program representation.
Yes. Lets think of Static Single Assignment as the
On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 02:47:39PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
On 1 June 2015 at 13:50, David Holland dholland-t...@netbsd.org wrote:
but ignoring that -- who (other than apparently the gcc development
team) is focusing on burning ram?
GNU, this is from the GNU coding standard; to me
Andrew Cagney skrev den 2015-06-01 03:24:
systems and generates reasonable code. Unfortunately, and sorry PCC
(stabs, really?),
Feel free to add dwarf, the source is out there, and it wouldn't be
especially difficult to do it. I just haven't had time.
Stabs was for free :-)
-- Ragge
On Fri, 29 May 2015 12:22:40 +0200, Johnny Billquist wrote:
On 2015-05-29 08:18, Matt Thomas wrote:
I have a Phase IV+ (so I didn't have to much with the physical address) impl
ementation but never got around to writing the apps. socket interface is ident
ical to DECnet-ULTRIX. DAP is a
Antti Kantee wrote:
On 31/05/15 06:05, matthew green wrote:
hi Andrew! :)
Who is appalled to discover that pc532 support has been removed!
In addition to toolchain support, the hardware was near-extinct at the
time of removal.
That prompted me to turn the old beast on. Apart from
On 1 June 2015 at 02:15, Anders Magnusson ra...@ludd.ltu.se wrote:
Andrew Cagney skrev den 2015-06-01 03:24:
systems and generates reasonable code. Unfortunately, and sorry PCC
(stabs, really?),
Feel free to add dwarf, the source is out there, and it wouldn't be
especially difficult to do
On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 11:41:38AM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
systems and generates reasonable code. Unfortunately, and sorry PCC
(stabs, really?),
Feel free to add dwarf, the source is out there, and it wouldn't be
especially difficult to do it. I just haven't had time.
Stabs
On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 09:24:48PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
On 30 May 2015 at 19:09, David Holland dholland-t...@netbsd.org wrote:
The reason I floated the idea of forking is that an OS that's
specifically intended to be a high-quality Unix for older hardware can
make a different set
On 1 June 2015 at 12:54, David Holland dholland-t...@netbsd.org wrote:
On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 11:41:38AM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
systems and generates reasonable code. Unfortunately, and sorry PCC
(stabs, really?),
Feel free to add dwarf, the source is out there, and it
On Mon, 1 Jun 2015, Andrew Cagney wrote:
PCC, as a classic C compiler, only generates debug information at
-O0. This this is because the stabs code is restricted to the
un-optimized code generator path.
this is not actually the case btw, and I don't recall it being like that
in the last few
On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 05:50:07PM +, David Holland wrote:
On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 09:24:48PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
(oh and please delete C++ groff, just replace it with that AWK script)
which awk script? :-)
(quite seriously, I've been looking for a while for an alternative
(oh and please delete C++ groff, just replace it with that AWK script)
which awk script? :-)
(quite seriously, I've been looking for a while for an alternative to
groff for typesetting the miscellaneous articles in base.
I was thinking of http://doc.cat-v.org/henry_spencer/awf/ which I
On 1 June 2015 at 13:50, David Holland dholland-t...@netbsd.org wrote:
but ignoring that -- who (other than apparently the gcc development
team) is focusing on burning ram?
GNU, this is from the GNU coding standard; to me it explains some of
the design choices I find in many GNU utilities:
For
On 5/30/15 6:16 PM, David Holland wrote:
My thought is that rather than shim layers we (fsvo we) ought to be
aggressively producing an alternative design, with the goal of getting
it to the point where application developers take notice instead of
robotically following where gnome/kde lead.
On 1 June 2015 at 15:13, Iain Hibbert plu...@ogmig.net wrote:
On Mon, 1 Jun 2015, Andrew Cagney wrote:
PCC, as a classic C compiler, only generates debug information at
-O0. This this is because the stabs code is restricted to the
un-optimized code generator path.
this is not actually the
Yes, I'm being hypocritical :-)
On 31 May 2015 at 02:05, matthew green m...@eterna.com.au wrote:
hi Andrew! :)
Who is appalled to discover that pc532 support has been removed!
get your GCC and binutils and GDB pals to put the support back
in the toolchain and we'll have something to talk
On 30 May 2015 at 19:09, David Holland dholland-t...@netbsd.org wrote:
The reason I floated the idea of forking is that an OS that's
specifically intended to be a high-quality Unix for older hardware can
make a different set of decisions (most notably, it can let C++ go
hang) and this allows
hi Andrew! :)
Who is appalled to discover that pc532 support has been removed!
get your GCC and binutils and GDB pals to put the support back
in the toolchain and we'll have something to talk about :-)
note that we've revived the playstation2 port now that its has
had its toolchain components
On 31 May 2015 at 00:09, David Holland dholland-t...@netbsd.org wrote:
I'm saying that, fundamentally, if you want to run gcc4 or gcc5 on a
Sparc IPC that you're going to have problems. There is no way around
this, except maybe to float a new compiler with the specific goal of
both being
On 31/05/15 06:05, matthew green wrote:
hi Andrew! :)
Who is appalled to discover that pc532 support has been removed!
In addition to toolchain support, the hardware was near-extinct at the
time of removal.
Now, the hardware is no longer near-extinct:
http://cpu-ns32k.net/
I used the
Antti Kantee wrote:
On 31/05/15 06:05, matthew green wrote:
hi Andrew! :)
Who is appalled to discover that pc532 support has been removed!
In addition to toolchain support, the hardware was near-extinct at the
time of removal.
Now, the hardware is no longer near-extinct:
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 12:49:18PM +0200, Gert Doering wrote:
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 10:22:35AM +, David Holland wrote:
Because of these trends, I've been thinking for a while now that maybe
it's getting to be time to fork. That would allow having one project
that intends to stay
On May 29, 2015, at 2:20 PM, Johnny Billquist b...@update.uu.se wrote:
On 2015-05-29 16:35, paul_kon...@dell.com wrote:
...
DAP would be really nice, but it's complex. But I like the capabilities.
I wouldn’t have thought of DAP as all that complex; after all it fits in
PDP11 systems.
On May 29, 2015, at 1:31 PM, paul_kon...@dell.com wrote:
No, transfering a whole file is a single stream of stuff; reading individual
records is a more complex handshake. And apart from that, things get
significantly simpler if you only support Sequential files. Simpler still if
you
At date and time Fri, 29 May 2015 11:09:08 -0500, J. Lewis Muir wrote:
On 5/29/15 5:22 AM, David Holland wrote:
Because of these trends, I've been thinking for a while now that maybe
it's getting to be time to fork.
Hello, David!
I started using NetBSD because of its small base system
Johnny Billquist
On 2015-05-28 21:19, Tom Ivar Helbekkmo wrote:
paul_kon...@dell.com writes:
And DECnet nodes exist around the Internet; the “Hobbyist DECnet”
group (“hecnet”) is the main focus of that activity as far as I know.
...and while I'm sure Johnny Billquist can supply more
On 2015-05-30 21:37, David Holland wrote:
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 12:49:18PM +0200, Gert Doering wrote:
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 10:22:35AM +, David Holland wrote:
Because of these trends, I've been thinking for a while now that maybe
it's getting to be time to fork. That would
On 2015-05-30 00:13, Matt Thomas wrote:
On May 29, 2015, at 1:31 PM, paul_kon...@dell.com wrote:
No, transfering a whole file is a single stream of stuff; reading individual
records is a more complex handshake. And apart from that, things get
significantly simpler if you only support
On May 29, 2015, at 6:22 AM, Johnny Billquist b...@update.uu.se wrote:
On 2015-05-29 08:18, Matt Thomas wrote:
...
I have a Phase IV+ (so I didn’t have to much with the physical address)
implementation but never got around to writing the apps. socket interface
is identical to
On 2015-05-29 16:35, paul_kon...@dell.com wrote:
On May 29, 2015, at 6:22 AM, Johnny Billquist b...@update.uu.se wrote:
On 2015-05-29 08:18, Matt Thomas wrote:
...
I have a Phase IV+ (so I didn’t have to much with the physical address)
implementation but never got around to writing the
On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 11:05:30PM +0200, Johnny Billquist wrote:
I would argue that this has happened already - FreeBSD and NetBSD are
the results... at least from the outside, this is how it looks like,
with FreeBSD focusing on few platforms but modernizing itself quite
a bit
On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 10:45:46PM +0200, Gert Doering wrote:
On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 07:37:04PM +, David Holland wrote:
I would argue that this has happened already - FreeBSD and NetBSD are
the results... at least from the outside, this is how it looks like,
with FreeBSD
On 05/29/15 20:15, Gerard Lally wrote:
At date and time Fri, 29 May 2015 11:09:08 -0500, J. Lewis Muir wrote:
On 5/29/15 5:22 AM, David Holland wrote:
Because of these trends, I've been thinking for a while now that maybe
it's getting to be time to fork.
Hello, David!
I started using NetBSD
On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 10:45:59PM +0100, Dave Tyson wrote:
I am with Gerald on this. Having used NetBSD from 0.8 I really appreciate
the single source tree for all architectures and the ability to cross build
painlessly from different platforms. I also like the community and the fact
that
There's a complex tradeoff here
On 29 May 2015 at 12:09, J. Lewis Muir jlm...@imca-cat.org wrote:
In Evolving Frameworks, [2] Don Roberts and Ralph Johnson suggest
in the Tree Examples pattern that you should never write a software
framework unless you have at least three applications that use
Hi,
On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 07:37:04PM +, David Holland wrote:
I would argue that this has happened already - FreeBSD and NetBSD are
the results... at least from the outside, this is how it looks like,
with FreeBSD focusing on few platforms but modernizing itself quite
a bit
On May 28, 2015, at 4:15 PM, Johnny Billquist b...@update.uu.se wrote:
On 2015-05-28 21:19, Tom Ivar Helbekkmo wrote:
paul_kon...@dell.com writes:
And DECnet nodes exist around the Internet; the “Hobbyist DECnet”
group (“hecnet”) is the main focus of that activity as far as I know.
On 2015-05-28 21:19, Tom Ivar Helbekkmo wrote:
paul_kon...@dell.com writes:
And DECnet nodes exist around the Internet; the “Hobbyist DECnet”
group (“hecnet”) is the main focus of that activity as far as I know.
...and while I'm sure Johnny Billquist can supply more details, and
correct me
On 5/28/2015 12:39 PM, Robert Swindells wrote:
Radoslaw Kujawa radoslaw.kuj...@c0ff33.net wrote:
The same arguments might be made against the plan to remove ATM
support.
I've got no problem with keeping it, removing it isn't really
intellectually rewarding I thought it more of a
David Holland dholland-t...@netbsd.org wrote:
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 08:06:56PM +0200, Tom Ivar Helbekkmo wrote:
Me, too. What NetBSD offers, that no other O/S offers, is the support
for platforms that are no longer mainstream. I've run it on Sparc and
VAX processors for years, and hope
Hi,
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 10:22:35AM +, David Holland wrote:
Because of these trends, I've been thinking for a while now that maybe
it's getting to be time to fork. That would allow having one project
that intends to stay current, with all the attendant requirements,
which probably
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 08:06:56PM +0200, Tom Ivar Helbekkmo wrote:
Me, too. What NetBSD offers, that no other O/S offers, is the support
for platforms that are no longer mainstream. I've run it on Sparc and
VAX processors for years, and hope to continue playing with these old
machines.
On 2015-05-29 08:18, Matt Thomas wrote:
On May 28, 2015, at 4:15 PM, Johnny Billquist b...@update.uu.se wrote:
On 2015-05-28 21:19, Tom Ivar Helbekkmo wrote:
paul_kon...@dell.com writes:
And DECnet nodes exist around the Internet; the “Hobbyist DECnet”
group (“hecnet”) is the main focus of
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 05:01:02PM +, paul_kon...@dell.com wrote:
But I too find it regrettable and possibly dangerous. One of my
copious-spare-time projects is to dig up enough specs to add a DECnet
stack to my systems;
DECnet phase IV specs are readily available and good
Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 10:22:35 +
From: David Holland dholland-t...@netbsd.org
Because of these trends, I've been thinking for a while now that maybe
it's getting to be time to fork. That would allow having one project
that intends to stay current, with all the attendant
On 28 May, 2015, at 17:57 , Tyler Retzlaff r...@omicron-persei-8.net wrote:
On 5/28/2015 12:39 PM, Robert Swindells wrote:
Radoslaw Kujawa radoslaw.kuj...@c0ff33.net wrote:
The same arguments might be made against the plan to remove ATM
support.
I've got no problem with keeping it,
On 5/29/15 5:22 AM, David Holland wrote:
Because of these trends, I've been thinking for a while now that maybe
it's getting to be time to fork.
Hello, David!
I started using NetBSD because of its small base system disk and memory
footprint, focus on security, support for many machine
mo...@rodents-montreal.org writes:
But I too find it regrettable and possibly dangerous.
Me, too. What NetBSD offers, that no other O/S offers, is the support
for platforms that are no longer mainstream. I've run it on Sparc and
VAX processors for years, and hope to continue playing with
Taylor R Campbell campbell+netbsd-tech-k...@mumble.net writes:
Diversity is great, but only if it is exercised.
Yeah, but some of the old stuff is always going to be used off and on,
as people with an interest in the particular technology come and go.
Ditching support for something the moment
paul_kon...@dell.com writes:
And DECnet nodes exist around the Internet; the “Hobbyist DECnet”
group (“hecnet”) is the main focus of that activity as far as I know.
...and while I'm sure Johnny Billquist can supply more details, and
correct me if I'm wrong, DECnet on NetBSD seems to me to be
On May 28, 2015, at 12:52 PM, Mouse mo...@rodents-montreal.org wrote:
Support for several legacy protocols was removed in recent years. I fear tha$
To an extent that's inevitable, because so much of the networking world
in general is becoming IP- and Ethernet-centric.
But I too find it
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 05:39:12PM +0100, Robert Swindells wrote:
[...]
I have been doing a bit of work on cleaning up some old Chaosnet and
CAN code recently.
Do you have some CAN code available ? I'm interested (especially J1939)
--
Manuel Bouyer bou...@antioche.eu.org
NetBSD: 26 ans
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 1:53 AM, Taylor R Campbell
campbell+netbsd-tech-k...@mumble.net wrote:
Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 17:39:12 +0100 (BST)
From: Robert Swindells r...@fdy2.co.uk
Support for several legacy protocols was removed in recent years. I
fear that our networking stack is
On Thu, 28 May 2015 11:57:11 +0900
Ryota Ozaki ozak...@netbsd.org wrote:
As far as I can see Arcnet is only used by the Amiga bah(4) driver.
Isn't it possible to keep it somehow, as an MP-safe network stack would
be irrelevant for the Amiga platform?
We could keep it with some pain, but
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Frank Wille fr...@phoenix.owl.de wrote:
On Thu, 28 May 2015 11:57:11 +0900
Ryota Ozaki ozak...@netbsd.org wrote:
As far as I can see Arcnet is only used by the Amiga bah(4) driver.
Isn't it possible to keep it somehow, as an MP-safe network stack would
be
On 28 May 2015, at 10:30, Ryota Ozaki ozak...@netbsd.org wrote:
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Frank Wille fr...@phoenix.owl.de wrote:
On Thu, 28 May 2015 11:57:11 +0900
Ryota Ozaki ozak...@netbsd.org wrote:
As far as I can see Arcnet is only used by the Amiga bah(4) driver.
Isn't it
Radoslaw Kujawa radoslaw.kuj...@c0ff33.net wrote:
On 28 May 2015, at 10:30, Ryota Ozaki ozak...@netbsd.org wrote:
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Frank Wille fr...@phoenix.owl.de wrote:
On Thu, 28 May 2015 11:57:11 +0900
Ryota Ozaki ozak...@netbsd.org wrote:
As far as I can see Arcnet
Support for several legacy protocols was removed in recent years. I fear tha$
To an extent that's inevitable, because so much of the networking world
in general is becoming IP- and Ethernet-centric.
But I too find it regrettable and possibly dangerous. One of my
copious-spare-time projects is
Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 17:39:12 +0100 (BST)
From: Robert Swindells r...@fdy2.co.uk
Support for several legacy protocols was removed in recent years. I
fear that our networking stack is becoming more and more IP and
Ethernet centric.
It isn't as bad as the Linux stack yet but I
Am 26.05.15 um 09:20 schrieb Ryota Ozaki:
Hi,
The next sacrifice is ARCNET. It seems it hasn't been
used for long years (7 years or more):
http://mail-index.netbsd.org/source-changes/2015/05/22/msg066175.html
So I'm trying to remove them but the target files are
much more than I had
On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 5:19 PM, Frank Wille fr...@phoenix.owl.de wrote:
On Tue, 26 May 2015 16:20:09 +0900
Ryota Ozaki ozak...@netbsd.org wrote:
The next sacrifice is ARCNET. It seems it hasn't been
used for long years (7 years or more):
On Wed, 27 May 2015 18:18:06 +0900
Ryota Ozaki ozak...@netbsd.org wrote:
What are the reasons behind removing working parts from the source tree
anyway? Aren't there more important things to do?
We're working on making the network stack MP-safe and runnable in
parallel. That requires an
On Tue, 26 May 2015 16:20:09 +0900
Ryota Ozaki ozak...@netbsd.org wrote:
The next sacrifice is ARCNET. It seems it hasn't been
used for long years (7 years or more):
http://mail-index.netbsd.org/source-changes/2015/05/22/msg066175.html
So I'm trying to remove them but the target files are
On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 6:51 PM, Frank Wille fr...@phoenix.owl.de wrote:
On Wed, 27 May 2015 18:18:06 +0900
Ryota Ozaki ozak...@netbsd.org wrote:
What are the reasons behind removing working parts from the source tree
anyway? Aren't there more important things to do?
We're working on
On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 8:38 AM, Tyler Retzlaff r...@netbsd.org wrote:
On 5/26/2015 5:46 PM, Michael van Elst wrote:
ozak...@netbsd.org (Ryota Ozaki) writes:
The next sacrifice is ARCNET. It seems it hasn't been
used for long years (7 years or more):
I wish people would put more energy
Hi,
The next sacrifice is ARCNET. It seems it hasn't been
used for long years (7 years or more):
http://mail-index.netbsd.org/source-changes/2015/05/22/msg066175.html
So I'm trying to remove them but the target files are
much more than I had expected (see the bellow diffstat).
Please stop me if
ozak...@netbsd.org (Ryota Ozaki) writes:
The next sacrifice is ARCNET. It seems it hasn't been
used for long years (7 years or more):
I wish people would put more energy in creating things
than destroying things they are not interested in.
--
--
Michael van
On 5/26/2015 5:46 PM, Michael van Elst wrote:
ozak...@netbsd.org (Ryota Ozaki) writes:
The next sacrifice is ARCNET. It seems it hasn't been
used for long years (7 years or more):
I wish people would put more energy in creating things
than destroying things they are not interested in.
i
86 matches
Mail list logo
