[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMo8BfLoqat+6CyOM2VV5Wz13NFMj54YisCogiVm95oDwdnTFQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2018 09:14:11 -0800
From: Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@...il.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Richard Kuo <rkuo@...eaurora.org>,
"open list:QUALCOMM HEXAGON..." <linux-hexagon@...r.kernel.org>,
Chen Liqin <liqin.linux@...il.com>,
Lennox Wu <lennox.wu@...il.com>,
Guan Xuetao <gxt@...c.pku.edu.cn>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
James Hogan <jhogan@...nel.org>,
"open list:METAG ARCHITECTURE" <linux-metag@...r.kernel.org>,
Jonas Bonn <jonas@...thpole.se>,
Stefan Kristiansson <stefan.kristiansson@...nalahti.fi>,
Stafford Horne <shorne@...il.com>,
openrisc@...ts.librecores.org, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: Removing architectures without upstream gcc support
On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 8:02 AM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> wrote:
> I'd love to see dead architecture ports dropped if they really are
> more or less abandoned. In addition to your missing gcc port ones
> above (minus openrisc) it seems like frv and m32r certainly qualify,
> and xtensa seems to be going that way with the glibc port being dropped
> now.
It's not that it's been dropped, there have never been an official glibc
port for xtensa, but we're working to get one.
--
Thanks.
-- Max
Powered by blists - more mailing lists