Re: Adding loong architecture to dpkg

[Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org>]

On Wed, 2022-11-02 at 18:27:17 +0800, Zhang Ning wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 02, 2022 at 11:04:21AM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > In any case, the loong64 name has already been used by other
> > distributions (Gentoo, ArchLinux, Slackware, etc.), so this is really
> > not unusual.

> I was misleaded by Gentoo Loongarch maintainer, he told me it is
> loong64, but actually, it's loong.
> Archlinux and Slackware are downstream ports, not upstreamed yet.
> 
> My question is, is it necessary to use same name for all distos?

Not at all, to me those names are more a testament that other distros
have rejected the loongarch name. There's never been a requirement to
use the same name as either the GNU triplet or the names used in other
distributions.

The currently documented preference is to append the bitness to the
arch name, which is something that tends to affect users, and I think
it's better to have it be explicit. This is something we have done
recently with newer ports (such as riscv64).

See <https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Dpkg/FAQ#new-arch>.

> When Loongson releases 32bit loongarch, then loong32 can be its dpkg name,
> if we select loong for 64bit. first come takes the shorter one.

I think loong64 (and potentially loong32) would be both fine.

For the endianness, which tends to be more esoteric, it makes sense to
obviate it by default for the predominant or only endianness available.

Thanks,
Guillem