Joachim Breitner <m...@joachim-breitner.de> writes: > Hi, > > > Am Montag, den 08.12.2014, 16:34 +0100 schrieb Karel Gardas: >> On 12/ 8/14 03:49 PM, Joachim Breitner wrote: >> > So what does that tell us? Maybe Peter can help us: Is it normal for a >> > Debian system to pretend that its a pre-v6 ARM, even if the actual >> > hardware is not? >> >> Sorry to get into this, but are you using EABI[1] port of HardFloat[2] >> port? Wheezy claims to support[2], the release before this was[1]. > > > I’m currently working on what Debian calls armel, so [1]. We’ll also > have to get it working on armhf (which seems to be [2]). Maybe things > are different there > Indeed I think Karel has identified the difference in that case. I'm on armhf. Thanks Karel! I didn't realize that armel supported such old hardware.
>> I'm not sure what you use so I'm asking, anyway, if you use[1], then >> it's normal it pretends it's pre-ARMv6. I.e. this is similar to i386 >> debian port in the past which was running happily on i686 but pretend to >> be i386 to be compatible with all the supported hardware... > > Yes, that makes sense. > > In that case, the use of the slow spinlock implementation is correct, > and GHC’s build system needs to be fixed to work in that situation, > right? > Indeed. It seems that armel is indeed supposed to support down to ARMv5 for which we'll need the spinlock fallback. Cheers, - Ben
pgpF_iIKteVvc.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs