svn commit: r227536 - in head: release share/man/man7

Ken Smith kensmith at
Thu Nov 17 14:44:56 UTC 2011

On Thu, 2011-11-17 at 14:34 +0000, David Chisnall wrote:
> On 17 Nov 2011, at 14:31, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> >>>> Kinda gross but "FBSD-9.0-RELEASE-amd64-amd64-bootonly.iso"?
> >>> 
> >>> Can't we use one if they are equal?
> >> 
> >> I'd prefer consistency. [...]
> > 
> > But it looks so plain stupid!
> I've had someone ask me what amd64-amd64 meant when I pointed them as the RC announcement.  I replied that I had no idea and suggested that possibly RE had been handed over to the department of redundancy department.  Having read this thread, I can now confidently say... that I still have no idea.
> But (with my compiler-writer hat on) please tell me that we're not inventing yet another incompatible form of target triple.  We have at least twice as many as we need already...
> David

This is the problem we are trying to "solve":

kim 1 % cd /usr/src
kim 2 % make targets
Supported TARGET/TARGET_ARCH pairs for world and kernel targets
kim 3 % 

We currently only do formal builds for a sub-set.  But as time goes
on who knows...  We could, for now, settle on just either `uname -m`
or `uname -p` so we only have one "name".  But note that's only possible
for 9.0 because pc98 builds aren't being done.  If we choose a scheme
that doesn't cause a conflict between the two powerpc builds we're doing
for 9.0 (powerpc and powerpc64) then if pc98 ever comes back we will
have a conflict between i386 and pc98.

                                                Ken Smith
- From there to here, from here to      |       kensmith at
  there, funny things are everywhere.   |
                      - Theodor Geisel  |
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url :

More information about the svn-src-all mailing list