Sam Ravnborg wrote:
Keeping ARCH=i386 and ARCH=x86_64 around is just a way to pretend
this is two diffrent architectures which is no longer the case.
They _are_ different in the real world... that's why
make ARCH=i386
is so often used.
Do we need a way to say "build a kernel that is 64 bit"?
If we need this then we should look at the most intuitive way
to say so and this should work across x86, powerpc and s390.
make 64BIT=y ARCH=x86
looks so much more intuitive. And it is generic.
This is just a proposal.
Or the short and straightforward
make ARCH=x86_64
to do the same thing (and incidentally what we've been doing up until
this point).
Don't get so hung up on "architecture" and actually look at what people
do _today_.
All other solutions proposed are simply _longer_ ways to do exact the
same thing. "more work for same outcome" isn't optimal.
Jeff
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
