Jesse Keating <jkeating@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Wed, 2009-04-22 at 15:04 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> The approach that I thought about when I first ran into this problem >> was to have the config script examine the value of `uname -i` to decide >> which output to produce. I remember being told that that wasn't >> acceptable, but I do not recall exactly why not. > It would likely require use of 'setarch i386' before calling the script > in order for uname -i to output the 32bit you may be targeting in that > run, which people may not expect. Right, it absolutely would require you to setarch before launching a build for the 32-bit arch. The question is why that's so unworkable. Especially when the present alternative just plain doesn't work. I note that it's already expected by a lot of spec files (or at least by several of mine) that `uname -i` correctly reports the target arch. regards, tom lane -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
