On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 11:18:16PM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > > On Jul 30, 2018, at 10:42 PM, Adam Borowski <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Also, this machine does have neon so it's not even armhf baseline. And so > > many packages compile but don't test. Thus, regressions from building on > > arm64 need not just hardware but also manpowers to detect. > > But why should compiling ARMv7 on ARMv8 automatically change the baseline > when it’s actually a hardwired configure option in gcc?
There's way too many packages that do compile-time detection. > By the same logic, lots of the packages we build on ARMv7 machines for > armel wouldn’t work on ARMv5. And many probably don't, but such gear is so weak that a good part of packages simply have no one running them. > Plus, we can build on the experience that openSUSE made with building > ARMv6/7 on ARMv8. Why are we ignoring that? How do you propose to do that other than sometimes digging through their packaging for a patch here and there? ᛗᛖᛟᚹ -- // If you believe in so-called "intellectual property", please immediately // cease using counterfeit alphabets. Instead, contact the nearest temple // of Amon, whose priests will provide you with scribal services for all // your writing needs, for Reasonable And Non-Discriminatory prices.
