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

Re: x86 triplets and multiarch [Was, Re: Bug#594179: dpkg armhf patch acceptance status?]



On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 09:43:41AM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-02-20 at 23:38:36 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 07:32:19AM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > > Given the above we'd need to either switch to i586-linux-gnu or
> > > i386-linux-gnu, it seems to me both will imply the same amount of
> > > changes? And thus going for the latter seems the correct solution,
> > > it matches with the other architectures, can be used as the multiarch
> > > paths and can reduce some divergence with Ubuntu, all of them a clear
> > > win! :)

> > Why i586 for the multiarch path?  That's an arbitrary baseline, based on
> > what Debian is currently targeting.  How do I sell that to the LSB and to
> > other distributions, most of which AIUI now use i686 as their least common
> > denominator?

> Hmm probably didn't express myself correctly. I'm proposing to go
> for i386-linux-gnu as the GNU triplet for both for Debian and
> Ubuntu (well, any derivatives for that matter), which for at least
> the paths is also neutral for everyone else (LSB, etc).

Oops - reading failure on my part, sorry.

But then I guess the converse problem is, what software makes assumptions
about the difference between i386-linux-gnu and i486-linux-gnu that will
hurt us?

> > > I'd say any such assumption in those packages is buggy, per above.

> > Yep, software is buggy.  We should be careful not to design a system that
> > fails because it requires software to not be buggy. :)

> Well, and buggy software should be fixed, right? :)

Yes, but it makes me nervous that fixing such software might be on the
critical path for multiarch.

> Anyway I don't see how using i386-linux-gnu would make the system fail, at
> least for the path part, for the autotools part at most it might make few
> packages not choose better optimizations/primitives?

Maybe, but considering some of the features lacking in i386, that could be a
pretty severe regression, causing the system to fail the "fit for purpose"
test.

-- 
Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                    http://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com                                     vorlon@debian.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: