Re: [PATCH] Remove doc on OpenRISC 1000

[Franck Jullien <franck dot jullien at gmail dot com>]

2013/3/20 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>:
> On 03/20/2013 09:35 AM, Yao Qi wrote:
>> [My mail sent yesterday didn't show in the mail archive, so send it again.]
>>
>> On 03/19/2013 09:35 PM, Jeremy Bennett wrote:
>>> It is quite likely the GDB code for OpenRISC 1000 was never submitted.
>>> The whole GNU tool chain was developed around 2000-2002, but only
>>> binutils ever committed its code. The tool chain is still widely used
>>> and maintained atwww.opencores.org.
>>
>> Hi Jeremy,
>> The patch was submitted in the link I gave in my first mail, but only
>> the doc bit was approved and committed.  I can't tell why the non-doc
>> bits were not approved.
>>
>>>
>>> I've copied Franck Jullien, who is the most active developer of the
>>> OpenRISC GDB port at present (I was in the past). The alternative to
>>> deleting the documentation is to submit the port.
>>
>> If the port can be submitted soon (in 2~3 months maybe?), I am fine to
>> keep the doc there, because it has been there for 10 years.  Otherwise,
>> I prefer to remove them first, personally.
>
> I'd prefer removing them from our tree too (and not wait).
> 10 years have passed, and lots of non-"target remote" targets have
> been yanked from the tree meanwhile -- I'm not familiar with OpenRISC,
> but it's arguable whether we want a new "target jtag" nowadays,
> compared to using the remote target (against something that talks jtag),
> and perhaps we have better mechanisms for "info or1k spr" today
> too (I don't know what that actually does).
>
> I think starting from scratch with a clean submission, that
> includes the corresponding docs would make a lot of sense.
>
> --
> Pedro Alves
>

Hi,

Our OpenRISC port is not ready yet. So, I think you're right.
You can remove the old openrisc documentation and we'll
start from scratch with a clean submission.

Franck.