On Mon, 2012-04-09 at 16:21 -0500, Mark Hatle wrote: > I do, and thus the hell that is ARM. I could not currently generate a single > package feed that work would on a variety of devices (like a traditional > workstaton/server Linux OS would.)
Well, actually, you could in fact do exactly that. What you couldn't necessarily do with the tunings as they exist right now is generate a package feed which is optimised for (as opposed to "works on") all those devices. But it isn't clear to me that you could do that with a "traditional workstaton/server" kind of distribution either. In the x86 world, for example, the majority of the big distros do not bother to ship individually-tuned binaries for different processor types, certainly not for the entire distribution. >Add in to that one of the tunings -- not indicated by the package arch >of thumb enabled or not There are multiple reasons why this isn't indicated by the PACKAGE_ARCH. Firstly, it's irrelevant: on v5T or newer, the question of whether a given package is using Thumb-state or not has no ABI impact and there is no reason for anyone to care at a compatibility level. Second, it may be unpredictable: the compiler is at liberty (although current versions of gcc don't exploit this latitude) to switch arbitrarily between ARM-state and Thumb-state as it sees fit to get the best performance. And thirdly, it's just another piece of distro policy in the same way as compiling for -O2 vs -Os (which we also don't encode into PACKAGE_ARCH) is. p. _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
