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

Re: Deciding new arm EABI port name


> Hi,
> Agreed with guillem that we'll decide this at the Extremadura 
> meeting next week, else we'll end up like the amd64 port with
> flaming for the name choice in tech-ctte.. 
> > >should be clear why current dpkg-architecture limits our choices.
> (emphasize on current)
> > <rant>
> > Pardon me, but to me it looks outright stupid to let development be
> > constrained by some perl script. 
> Well it's free software, so we can change it to whatever we want =)
> The big but is that it is also a very important interface, and changes
> should be done with care.
> >  I would want to install a Debian distribution compiled with
> > -march=armv5te -mtune=xscale -Wa,-mcpu=xscale on a newer iPAQ
> > and another one compiled with  -march=armv4 -mtune=strongarm1100
> > on my older iPAQ.

I think we need to define what components we want in the naming scheme.
So far I can see : Instruction Set Architecture (eg. ARMv4, ARMv5, MIPS32,
MIPS64,...), endianess, base library (glibc, uclibc), optimization

L & L


goa is a state of mind

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: