On Tue, 2009-10-27 at 12:40 -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> Id like to get some feedback on the patches that i'm proposing for F-13.
> quite a few packages that need to deal with differences between 32bit/64bit or
> multilib arches have defines for the appropriate arches. sometimes incomplete
> since they don't include secondary arches.
>
> I wanted to get some feedback. and see if there are other cases we should add.
+%multilib32 sparc sparcv8 sparcv9 sparcv9v ppc s390
+%multilib64 x86_64 sparc64 sparc64v ppc64 s390x
Remind me what the asymmetry is for here? Why is %{ix86} not in
%{multilib32} ?
In general I'd kind of prefer to see headers modified to use gcc's
predefines for __SIZEOF_LONG__ and friends instead, but I'll take what I
can get.
- ajax
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
