"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > 2. There is a whole range of syscalls missing for ia64 that I basically > > interpolated from elsewhere. > > I've been thinking of dropping CONFIG_IA32_SUPPORT completely from ia64. > I've heard no complaints that new syscalls are not being added to the > ia32 compat side ... which is an indication that people are not > actively using this. Some OSDs have been building with this > turned off for a while now (perhaps in preparation for "Montecito" > which no longer has h/w support for the x86 instruction set, or > perhaps because it represnts a huge block of lightly/barely tested > code that will have its share of support issues). > > I suppose I should do this by adding an entry to > Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt I don't think people actively look in there. You'd also need to do something like mark it CONFIG_BROKEN, which will wake people up and might make them go look to see what happened. Updating the now-BROKEN help text would make that nice and easy for them. > Any thoughts on the timeline for this? Is Dec 31, 2006 too soon? > (or not soon enough!?). You'd know better than we.. - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
|