linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: A question about architecture and byte order with RPMs

To: Ariel Faigon <ariel@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com>
Subject: Re: A question about architecture and byte order with RPMs
From: Alex deVries <adevries@engsoc.carleton.ca>
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 1997 11:45:41 -0500 (EST)
Cc: linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com
In-reply-to: <199712040810.AAA49407@oz.engr.sgi.com>
Sender: owner-linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com
On Thu, 4 Dec 1997, Ariel Faigon wrote:
> SGI has 2 programming models (source interpretation):
> 
>       1) 64 bit (aka N64 or 64)
>          compiled using "cc -64"
> 
>               sizeof(long) = sizeof(char *) = 8
>               sizeof(int) = 4
> 
>       2) Old 32-bits (aka o32) compiled using "cc -32"
>               And
>          New 32-bits (aka n32) compiled using "cc -n32"
> 
>               sizeof(long long) = 8
>               sizeof(int) = sizeof(long) = sizeof(char *) = 4
> 
> Going into binaries: o32 and n32 are not the same, the code
> generated by n32 uses more efficient calling conventions
> and more registers and cannot run on old versions of the OS.
> New hardware and versions of the OS can run all of them except
> if your 'uname' says 'IRIX' and not 'IRIX64' it can compile
> (but not run) N64 binaries.

The architecture of the binary RPM concerns itself with the CPU only.
>From what I understand in your explanation, supporting o32, n32 and 64
executables is a function of the OS and the libraries.  RPM binaries take
care of this already with their OS name field and their libraries.

So, I don't think we'd need to concern ourself with the o32, n32 and 64
options within the architecture field.

Does this make sense? It's important that we don't screw ourselves over.

- Alex

      Alex deVries          Rent this space for a $5 donation 
  System Administrator      to EngSoc per day.
   The EngSoc Project       Send spam to spam@engsoc.carleton.ca.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>