Re: Dead ports [Re: config(5) break down]

[Mindaugas Rasiukevicius <rmind%netbsd.org@localhost>]

der Mouse <mouse%Rodents-Montreal.ORG@localhost> wrote:
> >>> [...] sun2, pmax, algor, etc. [...]
> >> Right, and these dead ports must be euthanized.
> > For those single developers who still have such machines, as a
> > "hardware replacement" and moral compensation, TNF could buy some new
> > ARM or MIPS board for hacking.  Would be a win-win case, would not?
> 
> Wow.  Talk about missing the point.

There is a reason why I put "hardware replacement" in quotes.  Because
of exactly what you described as "fundamentally emotionally motivated".

> Given reason to think that $PORT does not actually have any users,
> perhaps.  But, as various people have pointed out, lack of downloads of
> binary builds is hardly evidence of that.  <...>

And I never said that downloads is justification for removal of any port.
In fact, ARM and MIPS have zero point something of all downloads.  They
are nowhere near being unused, though.

However, point being is that a *lot* of time is spent (when revamping
certain interfaces) by MI kernel developers going through, for example,
barely maintained m68k ports with a *massive* code duplication, acorn26
(in 3 or so months I could find only *one* person who could do testing
on it), museum's sun2 (IIRC, Izumi was the only who cared?) and so on.

Somewhere, I have a dusting clone of ZX Spectrum called Santaka 002, but
I am not of the opinion that it should be supported by NetBSD.  Not only
because it is unrealistic.  It would be a total maintenance pain (yet
another one) for *others*.

-- 
Mindaugas