develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from March 2020

Re: Killing Symbian, DOS (DJGPP) and NetWare in 5.34?

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Sawyer X
Date:
March 21, 2020 12:39
Subject:
Re: Killing Symbian, DOS (DJGPP) and NetWare in 5.34?
Message ID:
b9a728cb-d041-5fce-817a-1c9292493383@gmail.com

On 3/20/20 7:14 PM, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Mar 2020 09:28:03 -0600, Karl Williamson
> <public@khwilliamson.com> wrote:
>
>> On 3/19/20 3:50 PM, Tomasz Konojacki wrote:
>>> On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 20:15:54 +0000
>>> ilmari@ilmari.org (Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker) wrote:
>>>   
>>>> Hi Porters,
>>>>
>>>> We still have (no doubt bit-rotten) code to support Symbian, DOS
>>>> and NetWare, but nobody has been submitting smoke or bug reports
>>>> in years (https://perl5.test-smoke.org/ does not have them in its
>>>> OS dropdown).
>>>>
>>>> I propose we kill these in 5.34, which means we should announce
>>>> this in perl5320delta, like we did with a bunch in perl5160delta.
>>>> We actually threatened to kill djgpp back then, but never did.
>>>>
>>>> Any objections?
>>> NetWare and Symbian definitely should go because they're dead
>>> platforms that have been unmaintained for years.
>>>
>>> DOS (FreeDOS) and DJGPP are technically still alive but it indeed
>>> seems they have no users, so I'm not opposed to removing it.
>> Further research from Tomasz indicates, I believe, that if we got rid
>> of symbian we could get rid of PERL_GLOBAL_STRUCT.  It was added
>> mainly for mingw, which no longer needs it.
>>
>> I think getting rid of PERL_GLOBAL_STRUCT shows that there is real
>> benefit to removing Symbian at least; that it does cause unnecessary
>> work.
> Now, *THERE* I hear a good argument for dropping Symbian.


This is the most compelling argument for me too.

Thread Previous | Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About