sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
- From: Eric Sandall <eric AT sandall.us>
- To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] Architecture-dependent spells
- Date: Fri, 14 May 2004 11:12:05 -0700
Quoting 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 ;)
Agreed, and this way we don't have to modify all of our spells, just the ones
which don't work on certain architectures for now.
-sandalle
--
Eric Sandall | Source Mage GNU/Linux Developer
eric AT sandall.us PGP: 0xA8EFDD61 | http://www.sourcemage.org/
http://eric.sandall.us/ | SysAdmin @ Inst. Shock Physics @ WSU
http://counter.li.org/ #196285 | http://www.shock.wsu.edu/
----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Architecture-dependent spells
, (continued)
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Architecture-dependent spells,
Jason Flatt, 05/12/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Architecture-dependent spells,
Eric Sandall, 05/12/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Architecture-dependent spells,
Arwed von Merkatz, 05/13/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Architecture-dependent spells,
Jason Flatt, 05/14/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Architecture-dependent spells,
Arwed von Merkatz, 05/14/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Architecture-dependent spells,
Eric Sandall, 05/14/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Architecture-dependent spells, Seth Alan Woolley, 05/14/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Architecture-dependent spells, Eric Sandall, 05/14/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Architecture-dependent spells, Andrew, 05/14/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Architecture-dependent spells, Arwed von Merkatz, 05/14/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Architecture-dependent spells, Eric Sandall, 05/14/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Architecture-dependent spells,
Eric Sandall, 05/14/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Architecture-dependent spells,
Arwed von Merkatz, 05/14/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Architecture-dependent spells,
Jason Flatt, 05/14/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Architecture-dependent spells,
Arwed von Merkatz, 05/13/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Architecture-dependent spells,
Eric Sandall, 05/12/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Architecture-dependent spells,
Jason Flatt, 05/12/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Architecture-dependent spells, Arjan Bouter, 05/14/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Architecture-dependent spells,
Paul Mahon, 05/13/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Architecture-dependent spells, Andrew, 05/13/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Architecture-dependent spells,
Jose Bernardo Silva, 05/13/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Architecture-dependent spells, Andrew, 05/13/2004
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.