From: | "Henry B(dot) Hotz" <hotz(at)jpl(dot)nasa(dot)gov> |
---|---|
To: | t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp |
Cc: | "Oliver Elphick" <olly(at)lfix(dot)co(dot)uk>, pgsql-ports(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] Patch for m68k architecture |
Date: | 1999-06-14 00:50:50 |
Message-ID: | v04020a16b38a009ddd50@[137.78.84.130] |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-ports |
At 8:39 AM -0700 6/12/99, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>I reverted back the patch for include/storage/s_lock.h and seems
>NetBSD/m68k port begins to work again.
>
>I think we should revert back the linux/m68k patches and leave them
>for 6.5.1. Objection?
I would like to support linux/m68k, but on the Mac 68K platform the NetBSD
folks are more numerous. Unless linux outnumbers NetBSD on some 68k
platforms other than Mac (and I think Amiga) I don't think you should break
a (mostly) working port in order to support a less widely used one.
Just my $0.02.
Signature failed Preliminary Design Review.
Feasibility of a new signature is currently being evaluated.
h(dot)b(dot)hotz(at)jpl(dot)nasa(dot)gov, or hbhotz(at)oxy(dot)edu
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 1999-06-14 01:03:31 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] Patch for m68k architecture |
Previous Message | Henry B. Hotz | 1999-06-14 00:39:23 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] Patch for m68k architecture |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 1999-06-14 01:03:31 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] Patch for m68k architecture |
Previous Message | Henry B. Hotz | 1999-06-14 00:39:23 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PORTS] Patch for m68k architecture |