On 2024-08-02 15:05, Arthur Zamarin wrote:
Hi all
As continuation from previous arch changes and arch status [1], I want
to propose the next arch change for the near council meeting:
a. Splitting ppc64 keyword into ppc64 and ppc64le
Currently the ppc64 arch keyword matches both big endian (ppc64ul) and
little endian (ppc64le). While there are similarities, there is quite a
big gap in support level across both of them. If I understand the
history correctly, ppc64le is the "next gen" after ppc64ul, and it is
seen across upstream support, and as a result in the masks.
We have many masks on the ppc64 profile, which are there for ppc64ul,
and then unmasks for ppc64le. This split of keywords should make it
easier for ppc64 maintainers (since less ugliness in profiles), package
maintainers (simpler to mark ppc64le only), and for ppc64 users (easier
to request keyword for only one side, so no need to handle issues on the
other "arch").
I want both arches to be of same state (stable arches, with profiles
remaining at current state).
b. Splitting riscv keyword into riscv and riscv32
I'm not part of the riscv arch team, but I understood from dilfridge
that riscv64 and riscv32 are very different, and having both behind the
same keyword creates various issues. Since I already propose spliting
ppc64, we can also split riscv on the same wave.
[1]
https://public-inbox.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/75654daa-c5fc-45c8-a104-fae43b9ca...@gentoo.org/T/
Agreed here, with the suggestion that riscv -> riscv64/riscv32 for
consistency.
