On 11 October 2013 09:53, Khem Raj <raj.k...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Oct 10, 2013, at 11:48 PM, Koen Kooi <k...@dominion.thruhere.net> wrote: > >> >> Op 11 okt. 2013, om 07:37 heeft Nobuhiro Iwamatsu <iwama...@nigauri.org> het >> volgende geschreven: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I have a question. >>> Why don't you unite name rules of other architecture? >>> Forexample, armeb is endian-big of arm. mipsel is endian-little of mips. >>> If you can unified name, arm64eb is better, I think. >> >> In an ideal world I'd do that, but that ghastly 'aarch64_be' is already in >> upstream gcc, binutils and eglibc :( >> > > Now that you work with them.
:) you can surely reached us before that... > can you find out the reasoning behind it ? we can ask...but it has been decided by ARM 3 years ago and we're a bit late in the game. the we is including us, Linaro. _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
