On Tue, 12 Jul 2011 23:06:12 +0200 Robert Millan <r...@debian.org> wrote:
> 2011/7/12 Alexander Kabaev <kab...@gmail.com>: > > Whatever happened to using a proper cross-tool to do the job? > > Why would one need to build a cross-compiler in order to compile > userland-agnostic code for the same CPU architecture? This would be > like requiring a cross-compiler in order to build things like GRUB or > SeaBIOS. > > > Why is this hack needed? > > The kernel tree expects flags like __linux__ or __FreeBSD__ to have a > different meaning when compiling for kernel space. Instead of "we're > building code that will run on $foo", they mean "we're building $foo > itself". This assumption is correct most of the time, but not always > so. My patch addresses some of the situations in which the assumption > fails. > > -- > Robert Millan The fact that Linux compiler with manually undefined and re-defined platform macros can compile is a coincidence and is not guaranteed to work and certainly is not a goal of FreeBSD project so this can be broken at any moment. Relying on that is unwise, putting hacks into FreeBSD sources to legitimize the practice is not the move I would support as well. Traditionally, IMHO. -- Alexander Kabaev
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
