Re: multiarch header file wrappers and ARM

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Rex Dieter wrote:
> Lennert Buytenhek wrote:
> 
>> On ARM, the preprocessor symbol __arm__ is defined, and %{_arch} is
>> set to 'arm', so something like this will work:
>>
>> #if defined(__i386__)
>> #include "blkid_types-i386.h"
>> +#elif defined(__arm__)
>> +#include "blkid_types-arm.h"
>> #elif defined(__ia64__)
>> #include "blkid_types-ia64.h"
>> #elif defined(__powerpc64__)
>>
>> If you have such a construct in your package, please consider adding
>> the relevant __arm__ bits.
> 
> Is arm even capable of multilib'ing?  If not, why even bother with hacks
> like this?

Maybe consistency so the specfile doesn't have to differentiate?  I dunno.

It seems like if this is the preferred way to handle this, something like

%multilib_wrap(headerfile)

would be handy in the rpm macros somewhere, if possible, and it could do
the right things for the right arches...

-Eric

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux