On 2019-02-28 09:05 +0000, Ian Campbell wrote:
>
> To spell it out: the gist of this is that it isn't possible to provide
> a single arm binary which works well for both armel and armhf (which I
> think is what Jeff is trying/wants to do?).
Just to clarify: it's not possible to built a binary which works at
all on both armel and armhf. They are different ABIs ('architectures'
in Debian terminaology). Modulo things like qemu emulation or other
very carefully constructed binaries a binary is one ABI or the other,
working together with others on that basis. There are then separate
questions of what base ISA (instruction set) it is built to (v5, v7),
and to what degree it requires/supports optional features of the
hardware/ABI (neon, fpu, maverick etc).
> The advice here is to instead ship[0] two binaries -- one targetting v5
> (no neon etc, aka armel in Debian) and another targetting v7 (w/
> possible(? I forget what is optional) neon and other stuff aka armhf in
> Debian and other distros).
Right. And neon is optional on armhf. i.e software needs to work
without it (because it's not present on all v7 hardware), but should
also support it if it improves performance significantly for that
software.
Wookey
--
Principal hats: Linaro, Debian, Wookware, ARM
http://wookware.org/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature