Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 10:45:01 +1100 (EST) From: John Birrell <jb@cimlogic.com.au> To: asami@FreeBSD.ORG (Satoshi Asami) Cc: jb@cimlogic.com.au, simokawa@sat.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp, sprice@hiwaay.net, alpha@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Alpha ports collection? Message-ID: <199812282345.KAA17028@cimlogic.com.au> In-Reply-To: <199812281100.DAA19630@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> from Satoshi Asami at "Dec 28, 98 03:00:11 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Satoshi Asami wrote: > * MACHINE_ARCH=i386 MACHINE=pc98 > * MACHINE_ARCH=i386 MACHINE=i386 > > This is what I wanted to know. Thanks. By the way, what does "uname > -m" return in the pc98 case? I think Kato had an issue with that which required that machine stay as i386 in the PC98 kernel. We should ask the pc98 crew about those issues. > > * Note that non-i386 versions of `make' have MACHINE_ARCH in-built. For > * i386, MACHINE_ARCH isn't actually defined in `make'. > > They get it from the kernel? (Gawd, I hate that.) In the FreeBSD version of `make', MACHINE_ARCH hasn't traditionally been set despite the fact that the code supports it. There is no point setting it now because of backward compatibility. We just test for MACHINE_ARCH in the .mk files are set it to i386 if it doesn't exist. > We need to do something about it for 2.2 machines. Well, alpha is for > 3.0 onwards only so maybe something like MACHINE_ARCH?=i386 in > bsd.port.mk would do. That's right. We assume that any future architectures will have MACHINE_ARCH set as required. -- John Birrell - jb@cimlogic.com.au; jb@freebsd.org http://www.cimlogic.com.au/ CIMlogic Pty Ltd, GPO Box 117A, Melbourne Vic 3001, Australia +61 418 353 137 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-alpha" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199812282345.KAA17028>