Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 07:03:27 -0700 From: Mark Peek <mark@whistle.com> To: freebsd-ppc@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: the abi Message-ID: <p04320402b56556cf4ab7@[10.1.10.109]> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.1000608100917.61343A-100000@haldjas.folklore.ee> References: <Pine.BSF.3.96.1000608100917.61343A-100000@haldjas.folklore.ee>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 10:51 AM +0200 6/8/2000, Narvi wrote:
>We have the chices of:
> 1) the AIX/PowerOpen ABI
> 2) the SYSV4 PPC ABI
> 3) the EABI
> 4) grow our own
>
>1) Really stinks
>2) Stinks, but everybody uses it
>3) Is a variation of 2)
>4) Need not stink in principle. We need to tell the toolchain what it
>looks like.
>
>1) is probably the worst, and I don't know the best.
>
>This way or other, how about somebody deciding something?
I haven't researched this at all so this may be a duplicate of 1-4. How about:
5) Apple Darwin compatible ABI
This would allow sharing of tools and might even have some chance of,
should I say, binary compatibility. :-) Besides, Apple might be the largest
supplier of FreeBSD technology when they start shipping MacOS X. Being
compatible would be a "Good Thing (tm)" while having a different standard
would fragment FreeBSD.
Mark
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ppc" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?p04320402b56556cf4ab7>