I can't speak for Tijl, but being able to build anything simply by passing -m32 to the compiler is my goal.
Did your Intel EFI work involve #defining _KERNEL anywhere? On 22 August 2012 16:04, Eric McCorkle <e...@shadowsun.net> wrote: > I ran into some bugs compiling things with -m32 in the intel EFI work. As > things stand now, there's a lot more involved in setting up a 32 bit build > environment. I'm not sure if it's possible to reduce this down to passing > -m32 to the compiler, though it would certainly be nice. > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Aug 22, 2012, at 4:09 PM, Tijl Coosemans <t...@freebsd.org> wrote: > >> On 21-08-2012 17:04, Dan McGregor wrote: >>> My solution is certainly fairly hacky, I just took inspiration from >>> NetBSD. I wanted to see if it could be done. While I was there I did >>> identify several files that should be common between i386 and amd64, >>> such as exec.h. >>> >>> Since reading your email I started looking at the x86 common code, >>> and have made some more code common; specifically asm.h ans >>> ucontext.h. I'll be putting that on github shortly. >>> >>> Since it does look like tijl hasn't committed anything since March, >>> I would like to co-operate and see what his plans were. The idea of >>> merging the i386 and amd64 headers into a common area seems like a >>> better idea to me. >> >> For now my goal was to merge headers that can be used by user code so >> it can be compiled with -m32. Eventually, I think it would be nice to >> merge all headers and install x86/ as machine/ for both i386 and amd64. >> That would make the x86 headers similar to powerpc and mips headers >> (and arm when 64bit support is added there). >> >> I think I still have one or two (untested) patches. I'll have a look at >> it during the weekend. >> _______________________________________________ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
