MINOURA Makoto wrote:

> |> In <p0510030bb7304965024c@[10.10.58.2]>
> |> Erik = "Erik Bertelsen" <ebe@statsbiblioteket.dk> wrote:
>
> Erik> On my -current system, I find code dependent on M68040 in 10 different
> Erik> archs, incl. x68k, hp300, mvme68k.
>
> Yes, but it is already defopt'ed or not an option on those platforms.
> Try running config -v for them.

Two remarks:

If a given option is defopt'ed on some m68k-based archs and not on other, and if
it
influences code in arch/m68k (i.e. a file below arch/m68k as #ifdef on this
option), then I actually
consider this a rather serious bug.

Secondly: I don't know whether there is a formal definition of an option or not,
but if you put e.g.
"options M68040" in any m68k-based arch's config file, it will send a -DM68040
to all compilations
and this will cause different selections in some of the files below arch/m68k.
To me that makes it
an option.

In conclusion, I feel that PR 6724 should stay with port-m68k, but if noone is
going to do something
about it for the time being, you may as well suspend it with a remark telling
why.

best regards
Erik Bertelsen