From owner-freebsd-eclipse@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Aug 25 22:46:27 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-eclipse@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6971106567C for ; Mon, 25 Aug 2008 22:46:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sepotvin@videotron.ca) Received: from relais.videotron.ca (relais.videotron.ca [24.201.245.36]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A55E18FC08 for ; Mon, 25 Aug 2008 22:46:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sepotvin@videotron.ca) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Received: from leia.telcobridges.com ([96.21.231.154]) by VL-MH-MR001.ip.videotron.ca (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 6.3-4.01 (built Aug 3 2007; 32bit)) with ESMTP id <0K6600NFEHXE5AN8@VL-MH-MR001.ip.videotron.ca> for freebsd-eclipse@freebsd.org; Mon, 25 Aug 2008 18:46:27 -0400 (EDT) Message-id: <48B3363B.6090605@videotron.ca> Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 18:46:19 -0400 From: "Stephane E. Potvin" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (X11/20080726) To: freebsd-eclipse@freebsd.org Subject: x86_64 vs amd64 arch name for Eclipse X-BeenThere: freebsd-eclipse@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "FreeBSD users of eclipse EDI, tools, rich client apps & ports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 22:46:27 -0000 Hi, I'd like to do a quick poll to check what is the opinion of the eclipse port users with regard to the subject. Currently, for reasons that I've not been able to figure out with certainty all the FreeBSD eclipse version use amd64 as the arch specifier. The eclipse platform itself uses x86_64 as the arch specifier for the other intel 64bit ports. Would anyone see a problem with switching back the arch to x86_64 for eclipse-ganymede (and it's successors). There seems to be various places in the source code where assumptions are made that all intel x86 64bit platforms have an arch of x86_64. I tracked down a few of them but it seems that I overlooked some. I'm currently trying to add FreeBSD support to cdt 5.0 and the PDE builder keeps insisting that the 64bit fragments must be named foo.freebsd.x86_64. If people feels strongly against switching to x86_64 I'll track the PDE problem down but I think it would be best to spend efforts somewhere else and follow prior art (the other x86_64 ports) in this case. What's your opinion? Steph