Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2022 00:42:18 -0700 From: Mark Millard <marklmi@yahoo.com> To: Yuri <yuri@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why NOARCH packages aren't available on all architectures? Message-ID: <F9CA59DB-D9E9-48FB-B4F4-C8154542A26B@yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <a304fced-8617-b375-cf27-7399b6f4638e@tsoft.com> References: <689E23B1-BBF8-4A08-AC20-2CFABFB981AA.ref@yahoo.com> <689E23B1-BBF8-4A08-AC20-2CFABFB981AA@yahoo.com> <a304fced-8617-b375-cf27-7399b6f4638e@tsoft.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2022-Aug-5, at 23:51, Yuri <yuri@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > On 8/5/22 13:19, Mark Millard wrote: >> Part of what is going on is that having a NOARCH end result >> can still involve the build using build-environment-ARCH >> specific toolchains. >=20 >=20 > You are implying that NOARCH packages should be built on each = architecture individually. You may well have a suggestion for portmgr_at_FreeBSD.org about = combining materials from independent poudriere bulk runs from separate machines, but you asked: QUOTE Shouldn't packages which are NOARCH be equally available on all=20 architectures? END QUOTE That said nothing about such an idea. I would never have guessed from your wording what you apparently were actually asking/thinking. I thought that you thought that armv6 did not try to build NO_ARCH ports --instead of it being a temporary build problem. You also asked: QUOTE What causes this not to be the case? END QUOTE I tried to explain how things actually work currently for the NOARCH failures, but that was under my misinterpretation if your intent. > But NOARCH packages fit any architecture, regardless of where they are = built. Once successfully built on one architecture they should become = available for all architectures. There is no combining of poudriere bulk run results from separate machines/architectures at this time. You certainly can ask portmgr@FreeBSD.org about such ideas. > It's amazing that this isn't what is happening. portmgr might classify it as more-effort/too-complicated-to-manage than it is worth, expecting that most NOARCH builds work most of the time on most of the architectures. But, looking up https://github.com/xtensor-stack/xsimd reports: QUOTE The following SIMD instruction set extensions are supported: Architecture Instruction set extensions x86 SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, FMA3+SSE, = FMA3+AVX, FMA3+AVX2 x86 AVX512BW, AVX512CD, AVX512DQ, AVX512F (gcc7 and higher) x86 AMD FMA4 ARM NEON, NEON64 END QUOTE So, for FreeBSD, the following platforms are not supported from what I can tell: (from https://www.freebsd.org/platforms/ , other than adding powerpc64le) TARGET_ARCH's: mips, misel misphf, mipselhf mipsn32 mips64, misp64el mips64hf, mips64elhf powerpc powerpcspe powerpc64 powerpc64le riscv64 riscv64sf sparc64 [I'm unsure about 32-bit ARMv4/5 "arm" (no v6/v7).] I'll note that the powerpc*'s are still listed as Tier 2 for "Projected 14.x" and all the mips*'s are listed for "13.x". sparc64 is listed only for 12.x . That appears to be far from a NO_ARCH context for FreeBSD. =3D=3D=3D Mark Millard marklmi at yahoo.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?F9CA59DB-D9E9-48FB-B4F4-C8154542A26B>