This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH] Detect and select i586/i686 implementation at run-time
- From: Roland McGrath <roland at hack dot frob dot com>
- To: Zack Weinberg <zackw at panix dot com>
- Cc: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>, GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 11:15:59 -0700 (PDT)
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Detect and select i586/i686 implementation at run-time
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20150826155705 dot GA26329 at intel dot com> <alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 10 dot 1508261628130 dot 13146 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <CAKCAbMj-hBMLEztKU1Q88PoTjcpd4o31y019SzeuMnftLi=N-w at mail dot gmail dot com>
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 12:31 PM, Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> >
> > Since glibc doesn't support i386 any more, you don't need both these files
> > - just put the i486 version directly in sysdeps/i386/ (and in general, any
> > i386 file overridden for i486 is dead unless some other file #includes it,
> > and again subject to #includes i486 files can be moved directly into the
> > i386 sysdeps directories).
>
> Maybe, to reduce confusion, sysdeps/i386 should be renamed to
> sysdeps/x86-32/ ? I know that might be a giant pain.
I don't think there is any real confusion. The first-order sysdeps/
subdirectory names use the configure tuple vocabulary, so it's i386
because that's the CPU name in the tuple. Indeed using different
names would be a giant pain technically, but I also think it would
create confusion, not reduce it.