Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 18:21:14 -0500 (EST) From: Kenneth Culver <culverk@alpha.yumyumyum.org> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> Cc: jstocker@tzi.de, Alexander Kabaev <ak03@gte.com>, Martin Blapp <mb@imp.ch>, <imp@village.org>, <edhall@weirdnoise.com>, <kris@obsecurity.org>, <current@FreeBSD.ORG>, <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>, <obrien@FreeBSD.ORG>, <edhall@screech.weirdnoise.com> Subject: Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT Message-ID: <20020315182033.A31185-100000@alpha.yumyumyum.org> In-Reply-To: <3C927961.80C43073@mindspring.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > At the risk of being yelled at, I have a question: Why do we still need to > > support a.out? I know that a lot of people MIGHT still have some a.out > > binaries lying around, but FreeBSD's default binary format has been ELF > > for 3 or 4 years (Since 3.0-3.1 I believe). I'm not saying that we should > > entirely switch over to the regular gnu toolchain, but is it really > > necessary to keep supporting a.out? Just my $0.02 > > The switchover is not trivial. You're asking someone to do > work for something that's not really valuable to them. > > There are certain boot code features that require the use of > a.out kernels; this is less an issue than it was, but there > were a number of things lost when we went to the new loader > that are important for embedded environments. > > Cross-building for older platforms (not as big an issue, IMO). > > Other reasons I haven't even thought of yet.... 8-). > Yeah, I was just wondering if there were issues making us keep a.out stuff in FreeBSD aside from the "I wanna run 2.2.x programs" issue. Ken To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020315182033.A31185-100000>