Re: is m68k really ready for testing?
At 4:58 am, Tuesday, April 8 2003, Aaron Lehmann mumbled:
> Get over it. m68k is an architecture, not a loved one. And it's dead,
> face it. I have nothing against the m68k port; I've used it and I
> think it's pretty cool. However nothing excuses the way that it's
> holding up testing, etc. m68k is a toy port, and this will be the case
> at least until basic tools such as gcc, binutils, vim, and perl are
> made to work correctly on it. If you care so much about m68k, you
> really ought to bring it up to par so that it's a respectable port.
Oh, lose the attitude. m68k is no toy. It's still being used for embedded
work, and is *stable* and unchanging. This is a good thing for a processor.
We have many clueful people working on m68k, so just exercise patience.
* moshez kills StevenK and eats him
<StevenK> moshez: No fair, you're a vegetarian.
* moshez makes an exception for good friends.
<moshez> I'm nothing if not accomodating