RFC: Dropping i386/soft-float and 386ex BSPs

Ralf Corsepius ralf.corsepius at rtems.org
Tue Mar 1 16:04:46 UTC 2011

On 02/15/2011 03:34 PM, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> Hi,
> I am wondering if the time has come to drop support for
> x86 w/o HW FPU (e.g. multilibs with software floating
> point. I do not know of any CPUs currently available
> which match this profile. If there are any x86
> w/o HW FPU available, please correct me.
> Periodically gcc breaks for this because no one else even
> builds this variation except RTEMS. This alone is not
> justification but it is a serious hint this configuration is
> WAY past its prime.
>  From a practical viewpoint, this would likely involve:
> + dropping the i386ex and ts386ex BSPs
> + dropping i386/soft-float multilib variant
> + maybe dropping i486/soft-float
> + probably moving minimum CPU assumption to 486
> in GCC for i386-rtems gcc.
> Any thoughts? Anyone care about i386DX w/o FPU,
> i386ex, and 486sx?

It's been 2 weeks since you asked ...

... Till responded he believes the i386 may have a user-base,

... I would expect these multilibs make sense for testing purposes and 
could be required by some emulators.

... nobody replied to the proposal to remove "i386ex" and "ts386ex"-BSPs.

 From this, I conclude,
- it's not clear whether these multilib have a user-base.

- the i386ex and ts386ex BSPs don't seem to have an active user-base.

Proposal: Let's remove the i386ex and tx386ex BSP _NOW_.

Should somebody start yelling in near future, we could resort to 
restoring them in CVS, should somebody start yelling next month, he 
simply "has lost".


More information about the users mailing list