Re: What's the plan for powerpc64 in FreeBSD 16

Minsoo Choo writes:

> After reading replies, I still have questions why we should keep powerpc64be.

> Second, regarding arguments about keeping big-endian support in codebase even
> if no one actually physically runs the code:
> This also applies to leaving 32-bit code (armv7) in tree for future
> compatibility.

I think that is a bit of a leap, although in principle I agree.

However, I am much less convinced that a relevant new 32 bit platform
will appear, than that somebody comes out with a 64 BE platform.

Bit-rot is a thing, and unless we are willing to say "Screw anybody
silly enough to create BE platform now or in the future" we should
still guard against it.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.