From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jul 7 14:48:00 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: arch@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9387D106566B for ; Wed, 7 Jul 2010 14:48:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from harmony.bsdimp.com (bsdimp.com [199.45.160.85]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 262018FC26 for ; Wed, 7 Jul 2010 14:48:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by harmony.bsdimp.com (8.14.3/8.14.1) with ESMTP id o67Efwxp031865; Wed, 7 Jul 2010 08:41:58 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2010 08:42:13 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <20100707.084213.353672579433544368.imp@bsdimp.com> To: Alexander@leidinger.net From: "M. Warner Losh" In-Reply-To: <20100707145634.13925yt8ztdkz4is@webmail.leidinger.net> References: <20100706.174919.29649800801850.imp@bsdimp.com> <20100707145634.13925yt8ztdkz4is@webmail.leidinger.net> X-Mailer: Mew version 6.3 on Emacs 22.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ObsoleteFiles and TARGET_ARCH X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2010 14:48:00 -0000 In message: <20100707145634.13925yt8ztdkz4is@webmail.leidinger.net> Alexander Leidinger writes: : Quoting "M. Warner Losh" (from Tue, 06 Jul 2010 : 17:49:19 -0600 (MDT)): : : > I'm wondering... : > : > Why do we use TARGET_ARCH so much inside of ObsoleteFiles? It seems : > like it should be used only when we obsolete files on some : > architectures, but retain them on others. Instead, it seems to be : > used to obsolete files that normally exist on a specific : > architecture. This seems backwards. : : As the person who wrote this initially: : : The goal was to only delete stuff which was not available anymore on : one architecture but where still available on others (as in the : 20040130 entry, IIRC at this time the rename was specific to sparc64 : and other architectures still had this lib). If it is not used like : this, it is a bug. Then we have a lot of bugs. About 45 of the 49 instances are definitely wrong from my quick inspection. : > Also, we need to change this, but I don't (yet) define a : > TARGET_CPUARCH. : > : > Also, why is this TARGET_ARCH and not MACHINE_ARCH? That suggests : > we're invoking it wrong if this is "needed" for the cross build case : > to "work". : : The goal was to have something which can be used like "make : DESTDIR=/... XXX=arch_of_dest delete-old" where DESTDIR is either a : remote FS for a system of architecture as specified by XXX, or a local : mount of something with the same properties like in the remote FS : case. Without the XXX on the command line it shall behave like the : architecture is the same as the current system. If TARGET_ARCH is not : the correct XXX in the sense as described before, feel free to change : it to something better. I think I used TARGET_ARCH after looking at : what make universe is/was doing. The TARGET_ARCH=foo on the command line is correct. However, the environment that these commands operate in should be the target one, not the host one. ru@ appears to have changed MACHINE_ARCH to TARGET_ARCH to, according to the comments, work in a cross-build world. However, I think he fixed that bug incorrectly, so I'll try to fix it properly as part of my general cleanup of TARGET_ARCH abuses in the tree. Warner