Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 27 Nov 2013 10:57:36 -0600
From:      Guy Helmer <guy.helmer@gmail.com>
To:        Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>
Cc:        svn-src-head@freebsd.org, Glen Barber <gjb@FreeBSD.org>, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r258672 - in head: . share/mk
Message-ID:  <90DAAE00-34A2-4028-BD45-FFEA280CFC3B@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <52959276.7070803@wemm.org>
References:  <201311270454.rAR4sOqI004103@svn.freebsd.org> <20131127050358.GG1710@glenbarber.us> <52959276.7070803@wemm.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Nov 27, 2013, at 12:34 AM, Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org> wrote:

> On 11/26/13, 9:03 PM, Glen Barber wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 04:54:24AM +0000, Peter Wemm wrote:
>>> Author: peter
>>> Date: Wed Nov 27 04:54:23 2013
>>> New Revision: 258672
>>> URL: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/258672
>>>=20
>>> Log:
>>>  At great personal risk, change the default for LIB32 from yes to =
no.  As
>>>  mentioned in UPDATING, you can even do it as an as-needed operation =
after
>>>  doing a buildworld/installworld.  You can set WITH_LIB32=3Dyes in =
make.conf
>>>  or src.conf.
>>>=20
>>=20
>> Thank you.  Long overdue, IMHO.
>>=20
>> Glen
>>=20
>=20
> A slightly longer explanation of what I was thinking:
>=20
> - There's a new round of 'make -j' problems lurking in there.  We are
> missing chunks of the ordering glue that cause libraries to be built =
in the
> right order when they depend on each other.
> - It's a waste of cpu time for the usual case, particularly for the =
11.x
> cycle for the next 1-2 years.
> - We don't build them properly - we invent cpu flags etc.
>=20
> The usual use case for 32 bit binaries seems to be:
> - running a 32 bit chroot or jail - this is unaffected.
> - running old binaries, usually from 4.x or 6.x when the 64 bit port =
was
> really green - WITH_LIB32 doesn't actually help much with this because =
most
> of the libraries are missing.
>=20
> It seems more likely we can do a better job with packages.  With some
> massaging, we should be able to use the compat-6.x/i386 libraries =
as-is, and
> solve the "old 4.x/6.x binary" issue in one go.
>=20
> However, ld-elf32.so.1 does require special handling.  I have =
something in
> mind that might make this moot though.
>=20
> I suspect I've made the powerpc folks angry though=85
>=20

FWIW, this would break 3rd-party software I use on amd64 that was only =
provided as i386 binaries.

Guy




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?90DAAE00-34A2-4028-BD45-FFEA280CFC3B>