[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: SPARC Status (Was Re: Secondary Architecture Status?)



On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 2:40 PM, Tom "spot" Callaway
<tcallawa redhat com> wrote:
> On 05/11/2009 03:55 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> On Mon, 2009-05-11 at 14:51 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
>>
>>> I would really like to see a proliferation of secondary arches in
>>> Fedora, but I don't think 'workstation' is a viable usage model for
>>> them to get started.  Most will have to focus on the type of hardware
>>> that actually sells for that arch, and yes I realize that can be at
>>> odds with some of the directions Fedora is going.
>>
>> Semi-sidetrack here: Ubuntu has a secondary 'architecture' called LPIA
>> which is, in fact, just an alternative set of compiler optimizations
>> which they claim results in better code for 'netbook
>> systems' (presumably meaning 'Atom CPUs'). Would that be something we
>> could look into, or not interesting?
>
> Sure, I see no reason why someone couldn't take that on as a "secondary
> arch". It would need a new arch identifier target for rpm to prevent
> namespace collisions.
>

x86_32? x86_green? It would be interesting to see what that would
break in RPM ;).

-- 
Stephen J Smoogen. -- BSD/GNU/Linux
How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed
in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice"


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]