[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

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



* Goswin von Brederlow <brederlo@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de> [031209 17:16]:
> Could. A i686 autobuilder (or a way to get the i386 to compile for a
> different target) would be needed.
> 
> Not sure how i484, i586, i686 debs are supposed to be build anyway?

This may require a bit of debian/rules hacking.  But since it's not been
a problem for 99.99% of the packages (exceptions being glibc, mplayer,
kernel, etc) we don't need to worry about these changes.  The means are
there... dpkg-architecture can very well return i686, but some packages
may chose to ignore it.

> There isn't realy any support to recompiled for a better arch. I guess
> they would need a gcc wraper that adds -mcpu=i686 instead of our
> -m32/64.

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.

-- 
				WebSig: http://www.jukie.net/~bart/sig/

Attachment: pgpLMrN90FZd0.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: