On Sun, 2017-02-26 at 19:04 +0100, Christian Schmidbauer wrote: > I don't think our patches will be mutually exclusive. Agreed.
> If I understand > you correctly, you are trying to make x32 auto-detectable, hence make > it work "out of the box". I like the idea and I also tried x32 > auto-detection in the past, but it seemed to me that the > infrastructure does not support it very well. I also don't think that > enough people use x32 to justify putting many working hours into it. > I seem to have it working. I need to expand the tests to cover it before I send a patch. I've been hopeful for a long time more people will try x32 if the key infrastructure and applications are in place. Clearly you recognise some of the benefits! > My approach of this patch on the other hand is much more general in > nature: I am trying to support any lib<qual>, as defined in [1]. This > allows cmake to be used in environments which have more specific > requirements. Hence it overwrites the default heuristic, which is > usually wrong in such environments. The x32 ABI is just one scenario > where you could apply this overwrite. > > [1] http://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/FHS_3.0/fhs/ch03s10.html > I wasn't intending to imply otherwise, I'd just like to see x32 treated as a existent thing by critical infrastructure components.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- Powered by www.kitware.com Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ Kitware offers various services to support the CMake community. For more information on each offering, please visit: CMake Support: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/support.html CMake Consulting: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/consulting.html CMake Training Courses: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/training.html Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/cmake-developers
