FWIW I think on the JDK side folks are converging on aarch64
And also using that name as the "CPU" field in JBS (the alternative
there being 'arm').
I'd find it easier if it was consistent across all these places.
-phil
On 4/19/21 1:06 PM, Johan Vos wrote:
Recently, we introduced the option (or are introducing the options) to
build OpenJFX for 64-bit ARM CPU's on Mac, Windows and Linux.
However, those 3 platforms use different approaches to deal with this
arch-specific options.
Since the PR's for windows and linux are currently still open, it might be
a good opportunity to decide on a standard approach for dealing with
architecture names in both the build.gradle as well as the
platform-specific gradle files.
We have to take into account that the different external libraries we
include have their own wishes for accepting CPU architecture info, so even
if we standardize internally on a specific name, conversions will still be
needed when invoking e.g. building media libraries.
See https://github.com/openjdk/jfx/pull/439 for the windows general build
PR and https://github.com/openjdk/jfx/pull/467 for the Linux media PR.
I am personally not really happy myself with how I deal with it in PR #467,
as I would like to have a single "TARGET_ARCH" parameter that specifies the
target architecture (also in case we are cross-compiling), rather than
doing specific checks on different locations -- but that require a bigger
refactory and I'd like to hear more opinions before doing that.
I am very open to naming conventions (e.g. arm64 or aarch64), but I can
imagine different people have different opinions.
- Johan
