Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 09:44:52 -0500 From: Ken Smith <kensmith@buffalo.edu> To: David Chisnall <theraven@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@FreeBSD.org>, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org, TAKAHASHI Yoshihiro <nyan@FreeBSD.org>, Nathan Whitehorn <nwhitehorn@FreeBSD.org>, svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r227536 - in head: release share/man/man7 Message-ID: <1321541092.82271.15.camel@bauer.cse.buffalo.edu> In-Reply-To: <AD227A51-FE06-4D9F-B1F2-D14B3EA08A32@FreeBSD.org> References: <201111151849.pAFInR3K012609@svn.freebsd.org> <20111116.232828.343708041526200614.nyan@FreeBSD.org> <4EC3D40A.5040204@freebsd.org> <1321457050.78238.10.camel@bauer.cse.buffalo.edu> <20111117124210.GB2051@garage.freebsd.pl> <1321535020.82271.5.camel@bauer.cse.buffalo.edu> <20111117143149.GA96475@FreeBSD.org> <AD227A51-FE06-4D9F-B1F2-D14B3EA08A32@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --]
On Thu, 2011-11-17 at 14:34 +0000, David Chisnall wrote:
> On 17 Nov 2011, at 14:31, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
>
> >>>> Kinda gross but "FBSD-9.0-RELEASE-amd64-amd64-bootonly.iso"?
> >>>
> >>> Can't we use one if they are equal?
> >>
> >> I'd prefer consistency. [...]
> >
> > But it looks so plain stupid!
>
> I've had someone ask me what amd64-amd64 meant when I pointed them as the RC announcement. I replied that I had no idea and suggested that possibly RE had been handed over to the department of redundancy department. Having read this thread, I can now confidently say... that I still have no idea.
>
> But (with my compiler-writer hat on) please tell me that we're not inventing yet another incompatible form of target triple. We have at least twice as many as we need already...
>
> David
>
This is the problem we are trying to "solve":
kim 1 % cd /usr/src
kim 2 % make targets
Supported TARGET/TARGET_ARCH pairs for world and kernel targets
amd64/amd64
arm/arm
arm/armeb
i386/i386
ia64/ia64
mips/mipsel
mips/mipseb
mips/mips64el
mips/mips64eb
mips/mipsn32eb
pc98/i386
powerpc/powerpc
powerpc/powerpc64
sparc64/sparc64
kim 3 %
We currently only do formal builds for a sub-set. But as time goes
on who knows... We could, for now, settle on just either `uname -m`
or `uname -p` so we only have one "name". But note that's only possible
for 9.0 because pc98 builds aren't being done. If we choose a scheme
that doesn't cause a conflict between the two powerpc builds we're doing
for 9.0 (powerpc and powerpc64) then if pc98 ever comes back we will
have a conflict between i386 and pc98.
--
Ken Smith
- From there to here, from here to | kensmith@buffalo.edu
there, funny things are everywhere. |
- Theodor Geisel |
[-- Attachment #2 --]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (FreeBSD)
iEYEABECAAYFAk7FHeQACgkQ/G14VSmup/ZzTgCfVMY8HT77kY1LUILF+o/aMxrq
7noAoIbzZf8+7TWXgrCwU2feBptxSgRp
=5HIz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1321541092.82271.15.camel>