On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 11:48:02PM -0800, Garrett D'Amore via illumos-developer wrote:
> Well gee… that’s helpful…. if I actually wanted to test this. The reality > is, I don’t. Running an internet browsers from the mid ’90’s (or is it > early 90’s?) is so… pointless. > > I should have known someone would dredge up some old archives somewhere… > > The point is, nobody uses or needs any of this ancient stuff anymore; outside > of a museum it has no real interest today. Even if that's true, what harm is it doing? If you want to make the case that new code linking with things like libucb is bad, that's fair, but we already don't ship a symlink for it. Likewise, I doubt there's any way for someone to create a binary in one of these old formats either, short of hand-assembling it or maybe some hack like GNU objcopy. We all seem to agree that no one is creating new stuff that uses these things, which is good; we also agree they shouldn't. The fact that this is SPARC-only is even more of a reason it can't possibly be hurting anything: there are no SPARC users and there is zero new development happening on SPARC. If I'm wrong about this, I want to hear the person who is actively developing SPARC tell us why this is obstructing progress. We purchase reward with the coin of risk. Even if it seems like the risk is low, unless there's clear reward to removing something I really do not see the point. If one person out there wants to run a copy of Mosaic Netscape from 1992, why should we break that? It needs to buy us something, and it just doesn't. I wish I understood your obsession with this. Breaking the past simply does not equate to improving the future. ------------------------------------------- illumos-discuss Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/182180/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/182180/21175430-2e6923be Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21175430&id_secret=21175430-6a77cda4 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
