Your message dated Fri, 10 Jan 2014 17:13:10 +0100
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Re: Bug#734842: dpkg-gensymbols: x32 is matching any-amd64
has caused the Debian Bug report #734842,
regarding dpkg-gensymbols: x32 is matching any-amd64
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)
--
734842: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=734842
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: dpkg-dev
Version: 1.17.5
I was surprised to see that x32 is matching any-amd64 at least in symbols files.
Is this intended? It implies that x32 is a 64bit arch too like the other
architectures matched by any-amd64.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi!
On Fri, 2014-01-10 at 12:29:34 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Am 10.01.2014 12:01, schrieb Daniel Schepler:
> > On Friday, January 10, 2014 10:46:10 AM Matthias Klose wrote:
> >> Package: dpkg-dev
> >> Version: 1.17.5
> >>
> >> I was surprised to see that x32 is matching any-amd64 at least in symbols
> >> files. Is this intended? It implies that x32 is a 64bit arch too like the
> >> other architectures matched by any-amd64.
It's matching that wildcard everywhere, in the same way any-arm
matches arm, armel and armhf.
> > To me, it just means that x32 uses the same CPU (in the same operation
> > mode)
> > as amd64 or kfreebsd-amd64.
Exactly, that match is on the CPU not on anything else.
> how useful is this in the context of the symbols files?
Changing that would introduce inconsistencies, and in any case is as
useful as having the preprocessor emit __amd64__ for x32 too, for
example.
> Otoh I think what I
> really need would be any-32 and any-64 matches for symbols files.
Sure, that's being tracked in #630342, which I'm planning on workin
on for 1.17.7 or 1.17.8, as I think it's one of the current big
deficiencies when handling symbol files.
So because the current behaviour is intended, I'm closing this report
with this mail.
Thanks,
Guillem
--- End Message ---
