Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 16:10:52 +0100 From: Richard.Brooksby@pobox.com To: Narvi <narvi@haldjas.folklore.ee> Cc: Mark Peek <mark@whistle.com>, freebsd-ppc@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: the abi Message-ID: <p0432041bb56565a4ff4b@[193.82.131.28]> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.1000608164341.66154B-100000@haldjas.folklore.ee> References: <Pine.BSF.3.96.1000608164341.66154B-100000@haldjas.folklore.ee>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 2000-06-08 16:52 +0200, Narvi wrote: >You are readying way too much into what I said. And, just in case anybody >*STILL* did not notice it: I will not be making the decision. I am but >trying to get somebody with the experience and knowledge (and willingness >to step forward) to make such. I don't intend any offense. By creating a list you could affect the outcome, even if you don't make the decision. > > >And I don't think a different standard would 'fragment' FreeBSD. >> >> That depends how much development has to be duplicated, and how many >> parts of the system have to be maintained in parallel. For example, >> if GDB depends on the ABI then do we have to maintain two variants of > > GDB: one for FreeBSD/PPC and one for Darwin/PPC? > >Why would we be maintaining the gdb for darwin? Besides, gdb (and the >rest of binutils) already support 1-3. There are quite a few people (including me) who would like to have a wide range of Unix development tools available on Darwin, so that they can be used in the combined Mac OS X and Unix environment. GDB (and all the other usual stuff) would be of great benefit. One of my clients will be interested in developing the server component of their application to run on Mac OS X. It will be best to do that in the FreeBSD-like part of Mac OS X, since their system is mostly Unix based. They will need tools. > > Personally, I think the ABI should be chosen to minimize porting and >> maintenance effort and maximize stability. To me that means choosing >> one that's either already well established or will become well >> established. Darwin's is a good candidate because Apple will be > > putting it on every Mac before much longer. > >The ABI should be selected for it's technical merrits, imho. Well, it all depends on what this project is _for_. All decisions should be justifiable in terms of the requirements. Since I have no idea what those are I can't really offer any opinion. In general, given the choice between something that is stable, maintainable, and compatible or something that merely has technical merit I would choose stable, maintainable, and compatible any day, even if it's clunky. I advise anyone else to do the same. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ppc" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?p0432041bb56565a4ff4b>