MK_ARM_EABI to retire in current

[Andrew Turner]

On Sun, 28 Sep 2014 10:19:09 -0700
Warner Losh <imp at bsdimp.com> wrote:

> 
> On Sep 28, 2014, at 4:18 AM, Andrew Turner <andrew at fubar.geek.nz>
> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, 19 May 2014 09:40:33 -0600
> > Warner Losh <imp at bsdimp.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> Greetings,
> >> 
> >> MK_ARM_EABI is going to die in current. It is the default for all
> >> platforms currently. I’m eliminating it as a build option. It must
> >> die because it invisibly (to uname) effects the ABI.
> >> 
> >> So, to that end, I see two options:
> >> 
> >> (1) Retire and remove oabi support.
> >> (2) Retain oabi support, but change its name to armo and armoeb.
> >> 
> >> The rough consensus of arm developers I’ve polled now, and in the
> >> past, is that we just let oabi support die now that EABI support is
> >> working for everybody.
> >> 
> >> Before I pull the trigger on this, however, I must ask if anybody
> >> has a problem with my doing option (1), and if so, what keeps you
> >> using oabi.
> >> 
> >> Comments?
> > 
> > As far as I know all the problems with ARM EABI on armeb mentioned
> > in this thread have been fixed. I think we should now retire the
> > oabi support and remove MK_ARM_EABI.
> 
> I’m game. I think we should move forward on option #1. We’ve had no
> issues in the 10.1 release related to this that I’m aware of. Should
> there be no further objections, my plan is to move forward with this
> later this week.

I've created a change for review at [1].

Andrew

[1] https://reviews.freebsd.org/D876