Basic change seems harmless to me, the _ARCH_ definition is a little
concerning, do we need
that definition for all arch's or just alpha?
I hate to pollute this already overpopulated arch naming mess. :^(
How about:
CPP_ARCH_FLAGS = -DARCH='"$(ARCH)"'
# Alpha arch does not like "alpha" defined (potential general arch
cleanup issue here)
ifneq ($(ARCH),alpha)
CPP_ARCH_FLAGS += -D$(ARCH)
else
CPP_ARCH_FLAGS += -D_$(ARCH)_
endif
CPPFLAGS_COMMON = $(CPP_ARCH_FLAGS) -DLINUX $(VERSION_DEFINES) \
-D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE -D_GNU_SOURCE -D_REENTRANT
Just a suggestion. One of these days, the whole ARCH issue needs to be
cleaned up, just not sure that will ever happen. :^(
Filed this bug for you.
6958257: Add support for alpha
-kto
On Jun 3, 2010, at 9:59 AM, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
Hi,
The webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/zero/webrev.04/
extends the build changes added as part of the Zero assembler port to
also support the alpha architecture. This has been used in IcedTea6
since July 2008.
The change to ARCH is necessary so we don't get -Dalpha which
conflicts with the use of variables named 'alpha' in the source code.
ARCH is defined as before for non-alpha architectures.
Ok to push to the build forest? If so, can I have a bug ID?
Thanks,
--
Andrew :-)
Free Java Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com)
Support Free Java!
Contribute to GNU Classpath and the OpenJDK
http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath
http://openjdk.java.net
PGP Key: 94EFD9D8 (http://subkeys.pgp.net)
Fingerprint: F8EF F1EA 401E 2E60 15FA 7927 142C 2591 94EF D9D8
