johngay at eircom.net
Sat Apr 29 21:12:36 PDT 2006
On Friday 28 April 2006 17:53, Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> Here's what I'd like to propose, and tell me if you think this is
> workable and beneficial:
I'll add my 0.02 Euros (-;
> We move out sparc64 and x86_64 to their own branch and leave x86 and ppc
> together. Then we can start a re-write based on Alexander's POC. I think
> this is fair, don't you?
Sounds good to me, if Sparc and x86_64 is so much different, it makes sense to
develop them separately.
> ppc, as you've already said, is similar enough
> to x86 in the way it builds in that *very* minimal adjustments or
> additions would need to be made. For that matter, due to the
> improvements made with glibc and sparc I could work on adding that in
> again, too. :)
As you see fit.
> Anyway, the biggest problems come from the cross-build techniques,
> right? If we split trunk into 32-bit platforms and 64-bit platforms we
> can simplify it a great deal wouldn't you say?
That also sounds good, but what about pure64 -VS- Multi-lib 64? Is it
possible/simpler/advisable to build Pure64 and then add 32bit compatibility
when needed? That has been my plan, rather than fighting with multi-lib when
I'm looking for mostly pure64. I haven't looked at Multi-lib in a while, just
fighting with Pure64. My own faults, not the book!
> And if you're worried
> about breaking an ARCH, for now, don't. When we do the re-write, focus
> on getting x86 done and the rest will follow as I, or anyone else that
> wants to help, is able to test the other ARCHs.
Well, I just about know enough to follow the book, FBBG, and ask intelligent
questions when I need to, but I've got a Dual Opteron with 2G RAM and loads
of drive space. I'm sure with a little guidance I can set up several test
builds and report back. The biggest issue is the wife is violently against me
spending too much time on the PC on my days off, so automating the builds
would simplify things in that area (-;
More information about the livecd