Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Arwed von Merkatz <v.merkatz AT gmx.net>]

On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 10:18:35AM -0700, Andrew wrote:
> > > with ARCHS when unset in DETAILs be set to all ARCHS that we support.
> > 
> > Good idea. Or perhaps we should reverse the ARCHS flag and have it 
> > specify the
> > architectures this spell does /not/ work on, as that would probably be the
> > smaller list.
> > 
> Im going to try and formalize the semantics:
> 
> We'll have an ARCHS and a NO_ARCH variable (or whatever you want to
> call them, i really dont care either way)
> 
> If neither of those are set then the spell is assumed to compile anywhere
> 
> if ARCHS is set and NO_ARCH is not set then the host architecture must
>    be in ARCHS, and thus everything is assumed to fail
> 
> if NO_ARCH is set and ARCH is not set the host architecture must not be
>    in the list, and thus everything else is assumed to work
> 
> 
> if BOTH ARCHS and NO_ARCH are set, then we end up in a situation where
>    we've assumed anything not in either list will both succeed and fail,
>    so we must choose a default, in the name of consistancy I say we
>    assume that the spell will compile, which means that we ignore ARCHS
>    and just make sure that the host architecture is not in NO_ARCH.
> 
> -Andrew
 
Sounds good. I guess we can assume both ARCHS and NO_ARCH set in the
same file won't happen except when people doing p4 submit while
asleep/drunk/otherwise unable to think ;)

-- 
Arwed v. Merkatz                              Source Mage GNU/Linux developer
                                                    http://www.sourcemage.org