After a short discussion with Steve and later with Guillem on IRC,
I think it's time to make a final decision about this issue.
To cut the long story short, I agree with Steve's proposal on this:
arm-linux-gnueabi_hf
If we all agree on this, let's please have a dpkg release with the final armhf
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 09:43:41AM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-02-20 at 23:38:36 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 07:32:19AM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > > Given the above we'd need to either switch to i586-linux-gnu or
> > > i386-linux-gnu, it seems to me
On Mon, 2011-02-21 at 07:32:19 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> The gcc-4.4:i386 package seems to be compiled on Debian to target i586
> as the base instruction set, as can be seen in its debian/rules2:388,
> which implies changing the triplet would not affect this (barring the
> small change I'm atta
On Sun, 2011-02-20 at 23:38:36 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 07:32:19AM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > Given the above we'd need to either switch to i586-linux-gnu or
> > i386-linux-gnu, it seems to me both will imply the same amount of
> > changes? And thus going for the
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 07:32:19AM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> Given the above we'd need to either switch to i586-linux-gnu or
> i386-linux-gnu, it seems to me both will imply the same amount of
> changes? And thus going for the latter seems the correct solution,
> it matches with the other arch
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 02:22:44AM +, Wookey wrote:
> > The challenge, as Matthias points out, is that these triplets are already so
> > entrenched and there is so much software that handles x86 specially - even
> > if incorrectly! - that it's prohibitive to switch back to i386-linux-gnu as
>
[ Sorry for entangling the armhf bug with the i386 stuff, subsequent
replies should probably remove debian-arm and the bug report from
them. ]
On Fri, 2011-02-18 at 13:30:19 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 18.02.2011 11:13, Guillem Jover wrote:
> >[ CCing Matthias, as I'd like your opinion o
+++ Steve Langasek [2011-02-18 17:36 -0800]:
> > * The remaining problem at least for multiarch is the use of more
> > specialized cpu names for the i386 triplets, i486-linux-gnu on Debian,
> > which might change depending on the base instruction set to support,
> > for example i686-linux-gnu
+++ Guillem Jover [2011-02-18 11:13 +0100]:
Guillem makes some good points about how GNU triplets should (and once
did) represent ABIs, and that if they still did, dpkg (and everything
else) could use them as the definitive ABI-indicator. He's quite
right.
_Something_ has to stand as nomenclatur
Hi Guillem,
Thanks for letting us know your thoughts.
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 11:13:11AM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> * The assumption that each GNU triplet denotes a different ABI is so
> entrenched in the GNU build system, that we have things like the
> following all over the place to prop
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 01:30:19PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 18.02.2011 11:13, Guillem Jover wrote:
> >[ CCing Matthias, as I'd like your opinion on my proposed solution
> > involving some Debian gcc changes. ]
> The armhf patch for gcc looks ok, however I would like to see this
> better
On 18.02.2011 11:13, Guillem Jover wrote:
[ CCing Matthias, as I'd like your opinion on my proposed solution
involving some Debian gcc changes. ]
The armhf patch for gcc looks ok, however I would like to see this better
addressed in Linaro and/or upstream.
Yes but x86 goes to the other
[ CCing Matthias, as I'd like your opinion on my proposed solution
involving some Debian gcc changes. ]
Hi!
On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 12:27:30 +0100, Loïc Minier wrote:
> Trying to kick the dust a bit as having the triplet "in the air" is
> kind of an unhappy situation for armhf :-)
I think it
Hey
Trying to kick the dust a bit as having the triplet "in the air" is
kind of an unhappy situation for armhf :-)
On Wed, Sep 08, 2010, Guillem Jover wrote:
> We currently need something like this in dpkg-dev because the mappings
> need to be bidirectional, as dpkg-dev needs to be ab
14 matches
Mail list logo
