Re: ABI/architecture identification for packages

Quoting Baptiste Daroussin <bapt_at_freebsd.org> (from Wed, 21 Mar 2012  
14:59:20 +0100):

> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 02:34:03PM +0100, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
>> Quoting Bruce Cran <bruce_at_cran.org.uk> (from Tue, 20 Mar 2012  
>> 14:26:42 +0000):
>>
>> > On 20 Mar 2012, at 10:20, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
>> >
>> >> i386-32 and amd64-64 is weird and confusing.
>> >>
>> >> IMO, you should go either with x86-{32,64} names, or with i386/amd64,
>> >> not with a mix.
>> >
>> > Would we ever want to support something like x32 from Linux (which
>> > might be amd64-32)?
>> > http://www.linuxplumbersconf.org/2011/ocw/sessions/531
>>
>> Not related to x32, but related to the Linux keyword (yes, I'm in the
>> wrong branch of this thread, but I don't have the root anymore):
>>
>> Can you please explain how the linuxulator ports (linux_base-*) fit  
>> into this?
>>
>> linux_base-f10 contains 32bit linux binaries, which run in the
>> linuxulator on i386 and amd64. If someone steps up and finishes the
>> 64bit linux emulation on amd64, we would be able to use a
>> linux_base(32) and a linux_base64 (or however we want to name them
>> then) on amd64 (both at the same time). The content of the packages
>> generated on i386 can be used on amd64 (both are generated from the
>> same linux binary RPMs and the few FreeBSD modifications are rm's,
>> symlinks and config changes).
>>
>> Can you please explain and/or give examples which kind of metadata
>> those ports would get?
>
> for packages currently their will be two possible chain for the abi:
> the abi defined here or any
>
> any will be for scripts, data, etc.
>
> I was thinking about giving a multi arch possibilities for packages  
> for example:
>
> arch: ["freebsd:9:x86:32", "freebsd:9:x86:64"]
>
> when a package can be installed in both i386 and amd64
>
> and maybe in the Makefile:
>
> PKGARCH=	i386 amd64
>
> or
>
> PKGARCH=	x86:32 x86:64
>
> not decided yet
>
> for scripts:
>
> PKGARCH=	any
>
> But I haven't decided yet :)

This means that you do not try to compute this, you want to rely on  
metadata from humans.

How to you want to handle the common FreeBSD native port (has to be  
compiled, can be compiled without problems on all FreeBSD  
architectures (e.g. the "Hello World." program), the binary only works  
on the architecture it was compiled for)? I assume you do not want to  
add PKGARCH=$(NATIVE_ARCH) to every port. Maybe  
PKGARCH?=$(NATIVE_ARCH) in bsd.port.mk?

Bye,
Alexander.

-- 
Men aren't attracted to me by my mind.
They're attracted by what I don't mind...
		-- Gypsy Rose Lee

http://www.Leidinger.net    Alexander _at_ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7
http://www.FreeBSD.org       netchild _at_ FreeBSD.org  : PGP ID = 72077137