Re: Removing dpkg arch definitions for powerpcspe?

Hi Sebastian,

On Wed, 2025-09-03 at 14:14 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 2025-09-03 04:37:27 [+0200], Guillem Jover wrote:
> > Hi!
> Hi ,
> 
> > Was checking last year the status of several of the dpkg arch
> > definitions, and whether they are in use and/or useful, and
> > stumbled over the powerpcspe one.
> > 
> > This was requested in #568123, #575158. It got removed from Debian and
> > was never moved into Debian ports. Is it still being used anywhere?
> > If this is being used at all, I have no problem with keeping this, the
> > definition just seemed somewhat dead/unused to me.
> 
> It was in debian-ports and kept alive/ used for a while. But feel free
> to remove all trace of powerpcspe, e500 and so on. No need to keep them
> around anymore.
> 
> I don't think that powerpcspe users use recent software simply because
> support has been removed from gcc as of gcc-10:
> 	https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=23d3e2d5a7858670c3e4f6854e7a4d439278b128

FWIW, LLVM still fully supports powerpcspe, so it's not actually a dead
end. There is also some interest in the community as several New Amiga
boards used PowerPCSPE-based CPUs.

So, unless it's really necessary to remove it, I would suggest to keep powerpcspe.

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer
`. `'   Physicist
  `-    GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913