ABI/architecture identification for packages

[Alexander Leidinger]

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?

Bye,
Alexander.

-- 
Preserve wildlife -- pickle a squirrel today!

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