On Thursday, November 17, 2011 12:43:12 pm Ken Smith wrote: > On Thu, 2011-11-17 at 11:41 -0500, John Baldwin wrote: > > On Thursday, November 17, 2011 10:11:36 am Ken Smith wrote: > > > On Thu, 2011-11-17 at 14:57 +0000, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > > > > On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 09:44:52AM -0500, Ken Smith wrote: > > > > > This is the problem we are trying to "solve": > > > > > > > > > > Supported TARGET/TARGET_ARCH pairs for world and kernel targets > > > > > amd64/amd64 > > > > > arm/arm > > > > > arm/armeb > > > > > i386/i386 > > > > > ia64/ia64 > > > > > mips/mipsel > > > > > mips/mipseb > > > > > mips/mips64el > > > > > mips/mips64eb > > > > > mips/mipsn32eb > > > > > pc98/i386 > > > > > powerpc/powerpc > > > > > powerpc/powerpc64 > > > > > sparc64/sparc64 > > > > > > > > As I see it, for every pair except pc98/i386, second part should be used. > > > > For pc98/i386, first (pc98). Problem solved. ;-) > > > > > > > > ./danfe > > > > > > > > > > I'd still sort of prefer no special cases. However ... > > > > > > For the ISO / memstick filenames we could just program in `uname -p` > > > and ask the pc98 builder to modify the filenames post-build. But > > > we still have the dual names needed for the FTP site layout. There > > > it needs to be fully automated in the installer. > > > > > > So, given it seemed like we're sort of stuck with having the dual > > > names appearing in other places combined with it never causing us > > > to have special cases and/or conflicts it seemed like just biting > > > the bullet and having them in the ISO / memstick filenames too ... > > > > > > Have I mentioned I don't like any of the options? :-/ > > > > I think collapsing down to one name if uname -m == uname -p is not that > > terrible and would preserve the existing layout for most of the current > > cases (only pc98 would change, yes)? > > > > If you're referring to the FTP directory tree layout we wind up with: > > .../releases/amd64/9.0-RELEASE > .../releases/amd64/ISO-IMAGES/9.0 > > for an example of uname -m == uname -p. But for our two powerpc related > architectures we get: > > .../releases/powerpc/9.0-RELEASE > .../releases/powerpc/ISO-IMAGES/9.0 > .../releases/powerpc/powerpc64/9.0-RELEASE > .../releases/powerpc/powerpc64/ISO-IMAGES/9.0 > > I'm not sure I like the inconsistency.
Given the available tradeoffs I prefer this to amd64/amd64. We could also define the rule another way, which is if a given TARGET only has a single TARGET_ARCH you just use TARGET, otherwise you use TARGET/TARGET_ARCH. (This can be parsed out of the output of 'make targets' fairly easily.) That would let you have: releases/amd64/9.0-RELEASE releases/powerpc/powerpc/9.0-RELEASE releases/powerpc/powerpc64/9.0-RELEASE -- John Baldwin _______________________________________________ svn-src-all@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-all-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
