On Thu, 21 Oct 2010 17:16:06 +0100, Buchan Milne <bgmi...@multilinks.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, 21 October 2010 06:37:37 Olivier Thauvin wrote: > > * J.A. Magallón (jamagal...@ono.com) wrote: > > > On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 18:34:24 +0200, Olivier Thauvin ... > > > > > - could be the arch names more uniform ? in my personal scripts/setups > > > > > > I use x86-32 and x86-64. > > Is x86-32 a valid architecture for rpm etc.? While uniformity might be nice, > unfortunately vendors don't necessarily choose uniform architecure names, and > it might be better to match the repo structure to values that can be > determined directly (and not heuristcally) . > > I've also never seen 'uname -m' report x86-32 or x86_32. > > > > Moreover, perhaps in a not so near future some > > > adventurous soul builds Mageia on ARM or Sparc, so why not sort things > > > like > > > > > > distrib/cauldron/srpm > > > distrib/cauldron/x86/32/iso > > > > > > /rpm > > > > > > /64 > > > > > > /arm/32 > > > > > > /64 > > I don't know if memory address space is a useful differentiator here, as > features differ substantially in different ARM cores of the same family or > architecture version. E.g., Fedora has an 'armv5tel' architecture, N900 ships > .deb's with 'armel' as the architecture. See > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_architecture > > > > > > > /sparc/32 > > > > > > /64 > > AFAIK, the valid architecture names for sparc are sparc,sparc64,sparcv9. > I was just thinking of people navigating the tree structure looking for what to download and install. Directory names have not to be the same as RPMs architecture, isn't it ? And is more neutral, you can decide you build the distro for Pentium3 at least and dont have to change the folder names... ;) And, btw, what brain-damaged mind got the names i386 and x86_64 ? Solaris on x86 uses i86pc (arch -k). Somebody should try to push upstream (in rpm, perhaps) a decent naming scheme [x86,x86-32] - x86-64, [sparc,sparc-32] - sparc-64. You said that fedora on ARM uses esoteric arch codes, couldn't be possible to use x86-32 and try to get it into upstream RPM ? Looking for that info (where that thing was born), I found that this naming scheme (x86-32,x86-64) is even described in Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_64 so it looks not so insane after all... -- J.A. Magallon <jamagallon()ono!com> \ Software is like sex: \ It's better when it's free