From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 24 17:44:55 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D881516A4CF for ; Wed, 24 Mar 2004 17:44:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (troutmask.apl.washington.edu [128.208.78.105]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADD0B43D31 for ; Wed, 24 Mar 2004 17:44:55 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) i2P1is21065986; Wed, 24 Mar 2004 17:44:54 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Received: (from sgk@localhost)i2P1irFB065985; Wed, 24 Mar 2004 17:44:53 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sgk) Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 17:44:53 -0800 From: Steve Kargl To: Garance A Drosihn Message-ID: <20040325014453.GA65919@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i cc: Julian Elischer cc: FreeBSD current users Subject: Re: SF Bay area hackfest X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 01:44:56 -0000 On Wed, Mar 24, 2004 at 07:56:15PM -0500, Garance A Drosihn wrote: > At 12:22 PM -0800 3/24/04, Julian Elischer wrote: > >On Wed, 24 Mar 2004, David O'Brien wrote: > >> > > > Uh, what about basic functionalty on Sparc64 and Alpha? > > > >who cares? > > I want the platform to be taken seriously. It is going to be a > major challenge to the FreeBSD project to have multiple "tier 1" > platforms, and it isn't good to hear a cavalier "Who Cares?" so > early in handling that challenge. > I'm not so sure that Julian was being cavalier. After watching Julian, Dan, and David repeatedly ask for a sparc64 (and alpha) person to help implement KSE, I suspect Julian was really asking "Who cares enough about sparc64 to help implement the missing pieces to get TLS moving forward?" >From where I sit on the side lines, this looks like a catch-22. David doesn't want to spend the time and effort to upgrade binutils without the commitment of implementing TLS on all tier-1 platforms. Julian and Dan don't want to make that commitment to all platforms until they had the opportunity to implement it on at least i386, which can't be done with a new toolchain. -- Steve