Re: Ideas about the lib / lib64 names, subarchs, porting guidelines [Re: irc brainstorming notes]

[Goswin von Brederlow <brederlo@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de>]

Bart Trojanowski <bart@jukie.net> writes:

> * Goswin von Brederlow <brederlo@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de> [031210 01:36]:
> > > Ideally I think this too could be handled by autoconf.  configure
> > > --build and --conf options should be sufficient to let configure pick
> > > the right compiler.  We may have to setup symlinks/wrappers to support
> > > 'linux-${arch}-gcc' and so on.
> > > 
> > > I would like for gcc to build for the architecture specified by uname -m
> > > by default.  It would be nice if that was done right in gcc and not a
> > > wrapper, as it is hacked to do now.
> > > 
> > > B.
> > 
> > A -mcpu=host would be real great. The problem is that that would
> > require runtime checks otherwise if you compile gcc on i686 it would
> > break on i386.
> 
> I don't understand.  Using subarchtable, you cannot install an _i686.deb
> on an i386 host (unless you --force it).
> 
> B.

Has nothing to do with debs. gcc on i686 won't build for i686 but for
i386 because thats the common denominator debian supports (actually
i486 now but who is counting).

It would be nice if one could say "-mcpu=host" to tell gcc to build
for the host it is running on and not for the target it got compiled
for. Instead one has to tell gcc the exact subarch one wants.

MfG
        Goswin

PS: gcc-defaults (which provides the gcc wraper for gcc-3.3) adds
the right -m32/-m64 swith acording to uname.