> On Mar 9, 2019, at 8:22 AM, Maxime Villard <max%m00nbsd.net@localhost> wrote: > > New thread, CC'ed to port-pmax@ and port-alpha@, in the continuity of: > > https://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-kern/2019/03/09/msg024754.html > > Basically, there were talks about retiring COMPAT_ULTRIX and COMPAT_OSF1, > because they are of questionable utility, in addition to being clear dead > wood; as I said, limited use case, no maintenance done in these areas, > inability to test changes, and the list goes on. > > So, does anyone have anything to say about that? I'm completely in favor of removing COMPAT_OSF1 ... it was useful back in the early days of the Alpha port because the native toolchain was shaky (and there was the whole ECOFF -> ELF transition). But it was never good enough to run many real applications because it doesn't implement any of the Mach traps. To fix it for real, we'd have to implement a ton of infrastructure (including MiG), and I don't think anyone wants that horror show. COMPAT_ULTRIX is a much thinner shim on top of of COMPAT_43, similar to COMPAT_SUNOS, which we keep around for other reasons, and so I think the wood is a little less obviously-dead. Its biggest wart is having to exec ECOFF binaries. I don't know if anyone is actively using it at this point, though. -- thorpej