Bruce Korb <bk...@gnu.org> writes:
> On 03/05/12 09:01, Rainer Orth wrote:
>> This is where I need explicit approval and/or guidance:
>>
>> * There are some fixincludes hacks that from their names seem to be
>> osf-specific, but are not restricted to alpha*-dec-osf*. Bruce,
>> what's the best way to handle those? Disable them e.g. with a mach
>> clause like unused-alpha*-dec-osf* and see if anything else breaks?
>
> I think the right way is to require that all ports have a maintenance
> person build the thing at least once a year for all supported platforms.
>
> For such maintenance builds, I can trivially emit a list of hacks that
> got triggered during the build. Any hacks that don't show up in the
> list for a couple of years get marked as "obsolete" and trigger a build
> warning. If nobody complains about the warning, then its gone.
> Shouldn't take more than 3 or 4 years of disuse to get rid of the cruft. :)
>
> How's that for an approach?
Sounds like a good approach, since it helps even for hacks with mach
clauses that are matched on supported target version, e.g. a
*-*-solaris2* hack that only applies to Solaris 2.5 and is thus
irrelevant nowadays.
Rainer
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
