Re: Question on BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT in GCC on NetBSD/m68k

On Wed, 2025-06-18 at 13:50 +1000, Finn Thain wrote:
> > How is messing with a hobbyist project "harmful" in any way? That makes=
=20
> > no sense.
> >=20
>=20
> If your port was a pure hobbyist project, you would never have brought=
=20
> your complaint to the upstream mailing lists, where developers have to=
=20
> work with ALL interested parties and make the necessary compromises.

Can you list ALL interested parties, please?

I only know about Gentoo and Debian and both want to make the switch.

> But, as usual, you're trying to have it both ways. You pretend that wipin=
g=20
> wiping your slate clean and starting over doesn't impact anyone else. But=
=20
> then you complain when the upstream projects don't care to invest effort=
=20
> into your scheme.

Again, can you list the other downstream projects that would be affected an=
d
that oppose this change? Please come with actual evidence instead of just
remaining vague.

> The way to find a compromise is to build the thing you need, and then, if=
=20
> any of it is found to be useful upstream, send patches! That's how this=
=20
> process has always worked, has it not?

I have never denied that. The problem here is that I started a discussion t=
o
resolve a longstanding problem with the m68k port and you immediately start=
ed
shooting at it instead of trying to work something out together.

> Moreover, to the extent that those patches get merged, we will have the=
=20
> beginnings of a second ABI with a second tuple. To the extend that those=
=20
> patches get rejected, you will have a fork on your hands.

I won't have a problem with maintaining the fork. As I have repeatedly said=
,
the Gentoo people are working on the same change, so it's more like the ups=
tream
developers that would exclude themselves.

> So, some upstream developers will have to support both ABIs (for them,=
=20
> you've just created work). Other developers will have to choose between=
=20
> either one (for them, you've just make collaboration more difficult).

You're again being vague. You talk about Linux/m68k as if there were dozens
of downstream distributions and projects when there is in fact just Debian
and Gentoo which both, as I have said countless times now, want to make the
switch.

So, I have no idea what these other mystical downstream projects should be.

> This is a lose/lose proposition. And if you think I'm wrong about that,=
=20
> please just send patches and demonstrate why.

I have received multiple messages now, off- and on-list, from users that ar=
e
supporting my efforts as they see the value in making software more useful
to users instead of just insisting on adhering to a broken ABI that no one
really cares about anymore in the year 2025.

Adrian

--=20
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer
`. `'   Physicist
  `-    GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913