Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2011 08:47:24 -0500 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r217213 - head/lib/bind Message-ID: <201101110847.24284.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <4D2BE4F8.3030902@FreeBSD.org> References: <201101092347.p09NlB4M060802@svn.freebsd.org> <201101101433.18847.jhb@freebsd.org> <4D2BE4F8.3030902@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tuesday, January 11, 2011 12:04:56 am Doug Barton wrote:
> On 01/10/2011 11:33, John Baldwin wrote:
> > On Sunday, January 09, 2011 6:47:11 pm Doug Barton wrote:
>
> >> # Use the right version of the atomic.h file from lib/isc
> >> -ISC_ATOMIC_ARCH=${MACHINE_CPUARCH:S/i386/x86_32/:S/amd64/x86_32/}
> >> +.if ${MACHINE_ARCH} == "amd64" || ${MACHINE_ARCH} == "i386"
> >
> > This should use MACHINE_CPUARCH instead of MACHINE_ARCH?
>
> When this block was first written I don't think _CPUARCH existed at all,
> and/or had not been MFC'ed. Subsequently, nwhitehorn made the change in
> r209886 to use _CPUARCH in both places, however the diff from Warner's
> commit in r217071 (which is what I based my change on) clearly showed
> _ARCH
>
(http://svn.freebsd.org/viewvc/base/head/lib/bind/config.mk?r1=209886&r2=217071).
> So, I'm not sure where svn went sideways there, but it's definitely "odd."
Huh? Warner's change only used MACHINE_CPUARCH:
ISC_ATOMIC_ARCH=${MACHINE_CPUARCH:S/i386/x86_32/:S/amd64/x86_32/}
Nowhere in that line is MACHINE_ARCH used. Only MACHINE_CPUARCH is used.
> I have no objection to putting it back to the state that it was in at
> r209886, although frankly less diffs to RELENG_[78] without good reason
> make my life easier.
209886 did not use MACHINE_CPUARCH for ISC_ATOMIC_ARCH, and in fact the file
is now back to the 209886 state (nwhitehorn did not change ISC_ATOMIC_ARCH
to use MACHINE_CPUARCH).
Fixing this does create diffs to [78] because MACHINE_CPUARCH is not present
at all in [78], but that is because [78]'s handling of different endians for
mips, arm, etc. is deficient. You are likely stuck with using MACHINE_CPUARCH
for 9+ and MACHINE_ARCH for <= 8.
--
John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201101110847.24284.jhb>