I was going to go back and build on my Itanium box, and realized that we still haven't quite handled the question of coexistence of multiple architectures from one source tree. I had put that out of my mind for a while...
How shall we handle this for the LSB-si? I can see a few ways we could deal with this, none of them really pretty: (1) keep parallel trees. This works elsewhere in the source base because the machine-dep. files are generated out of the database using a bunch of perl scripts, so they don't get out of sync with each other. In our case, I don't relish the idea of someone having to check in the same change, say to a version or patch, in at least three, and in the future even more different place. Recipe for trouble - and after all, almost all of the files will be identical across all. (2) add conditional code to the xml. which is not really something native to the xml "style", so... (3) have the configure script do the work to customize. ".in" files would contain all the code, and the checked-in version of the file it will eventually generate could be the i386 one for consistency, but if you run configure in a way to tell it it's, say, ia64, it would generate the files that way (4) build some kind of sparse-tree approach, where an Itanium tree would only contain files unique to, or changed in Itanium, and the system would somehow know to go pick up the rest from the main tree I don't particularly like any of those, but we need a solution pretty soon... Mats
