This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH] PowerPC64 port part 1 of 7
- From: Roland McGrath <roland at frob dot com>
- To: "Steve Munroe" <sjmunroe at us dot ibm dot com>
- Cc: Geoff Keating <geoffk at redhat dot com>, aj at suse dot de,libc-alpha at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 18:10:49 -0400 (EDT)
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] PowerPC64 port part 1 of 7
> PowerPC requires a directory structure similar to sparc (common code with
> 32- and 64-bit specific subdirectories).
You have not actually answered the question I raised. You only actually
need powerpc32 if there is anything in powerpc now that should not be used
at all for powerpc64 and is not overridden by a file in powerpc64. Even if
it's not actually necessary, I don't object to moving the files if Geoff
prefers it. But you seem to have misunderstood my point and answered with
a lot of irrelevant information everyone already knows.
> As for the exact spelling, I discussed this with Geoff long ago and thought
> I had agreement to the shorter ppc32/ppc64 for the subdirectores. PPC is
> widely recognized as the abbreviation for PowerPC (TM). Also there was
> precedent in the source tree of the Linux kernel which uses ppc and ppc64.
Those are not what matter. In libc we have, and always will, used the
canonical GNU cpu names, and canonical means what config.sub produces.
This is not for any individual port maintainer to decide. End of story.