Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2012 11:56:17 +0300 From: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> To: Tijl Coosemans <tijl@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, das@freebsd.org, Dan McGregor <danismostlikely@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Build 32 bit binaries on amd64 Message-ID: <20120823085617.GL33100@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> In-Reply-To: <50353C77.2070602@freebsd.org> References: <CACS%2B7ZQSSoxqY8cNDa=uM-o5NJmXBb3WYTZ7iNDK_nNjjughUg@mail.gmail.com> <20120821084930.GM33100@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <CACS%2B7ZSjmZHUvQT1VAem85WuJmTLGGJMwmRc6RnRB8VwiPpAZw@mail.gmail.com> <50353C77.2070602@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--uY6A4WM8GrQcEArj Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 10:09:27PM +0200, Tijl Coosemans wrote: > On 21-08-2012 17:04, Dan McGregor wrote: > > My solution is certainly fairly hacky, I just took inspiration from=20 > > NetBSD. I wanted to see if it could be done. While I was there I did > > identify several files that should be common between i386 and amd64, > > such as exec.h. > >=20 > > Since reading your email I started looking at the x86 common code, > > and have made some more code common; specifically asm.h ans > > ucontext.h. I'll be putting that on github shortly. > >=20 > > Since it does look like tijl hasn't committed anything since March, > > I would like to co-operate and see what his plans were. The idea of > > merging the i386 and amd64 headers into a common area seems like a > > better idea to me. >=20 > For now my goal was to merge headers that can be used by user code so > it can be compiled with -m32. Eventually, I think it would be nice to > merge all headers and install x86/ as machine/ for both i386 and amd64. > That would make the x86 headers similar to powerpc and mips headers > (and arm when 64bit support is added there). Having only the usermode-usable headers merged is enough, IMO. Eventually merging everything between i386 and amd64, removing the excessive duplication of the similar code is worthy goal, but is not neccessary for the already very high-profile feature of working -m32. >=20 > I think I still have one or two (untested) patches. I'll have a look at > it during the weekend. If only several (small ?) things left, then the news are actually great. I think that we (you) shall announce that much louder. The feature is very demanded and needed. As I noted earlier, the big untracked issue is the lib/msun/<arch>/fenv.h. This is really important and hopefully last obstacle to have -m32 working. In fact, quick look at the i386 and amd64 versions of fenv.h shows that they are quite similar, as it shall be. The issue there would be mostly distribution problem, how to merge the files in the build and installation system. --uY6A4WM8GrQcEArj Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAlA18DEACgkQC3+MBN1Mb4gdqACg6hnKkuiEEDmRjyl0HJ6dBvwB 2dYAoIBduyw7GoMEcZIxD1WvB81FCgdC =OjAH -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --uY6A4WM8GrQcEArj--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120823085617.GL33100>