Re: CFD: the future of ports on powerpc64/12 and powerpc64/11

On 5/28/21 1:33 PM, [email protected] [email protected] wrote:
> [attempting re-send from a properly subscribed-to address.]
> 
> For a long time I have been attempting to keep ports building on
> powerpc64/12.  This, along with mips*/12, is still stuck on having
> GCC4.2.1 in base.  (Of course, in 13/14, we are based on clang.)
> 
> (I have not even looked at the state of ports on 11 in over a year.)
> 
> Although most of the individual problems are not that hard to fix or
> work around, the fact is that I have become overwhelmed by the number
> of them.  This is both for existing ports where updates switch to taking
> advantage of c11 or c++11 (or later) features, but, most notably, for
> the number of new ports added every week.
> 
> The problems noticed in the last 1-2 months are:
> 
>    math/openblas (I am told there is an upstream fix)
>    math/mpdecimal (affects lang/python* but it can be worked around)
>    math/clp
>    devel/indi
>    devel/py-gobject3 (also affects python)
>    print/libraqm
> 
> tl;dr: I intend to stop working on ports testing on powerpc64/12.
> 
> (fwiw, pkubaj@ has already moved on to 13.)
> 
> If anyone wants to pick this task up, please contact me.  But at
> this point it is simply taking too much of my time, on which I
> already have demands I cannot fulfill.
> 
> mcl
> 

I'm all for reallocating scarce and valuable man-hours to more 
sustainable and marketable products.  Now that we have a modern 
clang-based powerpc platform, I see very little reason to continue 
sinking time into legacy tier-2 platforms based on an antiquated compiler.

-- 
Earth is a beta site.