Am 11.03.2012 15:37, schrieb Jonas Maebe: > > On 11 Mar 2012, at 15:14, Florian Klaempfl wrote: > >> Am 11.03.2012 13:22, schrieb Jonas Maebe: >>> * I'm don't think that requiring yet another different ARM >>> compiler binary for this is the proper way. There's already >>> enough confusion as it is with ppcarm variants. >> >> But isn't this caused by the fact that we have the same executable >> name while it generates different code? > > Yes. > >> I currently think that having even arm/armeb/armel/armhf as cpu >> types is the way to go. This allows also to have units for all four >> flavours on one system. Currently we simply don't support the same >> target cpu but different abi in any way in the build system. > > We also don't support an RTL compiled with -Cp386, -Cppentium, > -Cppentium2, -Cppentium2, -Cppentiumm, -Cfx86, -Cfsse2 and/or -Cfsse3 > on the same system.
True, but they are not different abis, debian does not treat them different either. > For ARM hard float, you will also need different > sets of units depending on the exact kind of VFP cpu you have (unless > you always target the lowest common denominator -- if something like > that even exists for all VFP variants, since ARM is not that big on > backward compatibility and they have their own standard of encoding > the entire ABI, target cpu and all other details into attributes > inside every generated object file so that the linker can verify the > compatibility). But the abi stays on all hard float platforms the same? Indenpendent of the instruction set. > > Whether it's ABI or minimally required target cpu, the part that > causes the trouble is that you need a different set of units. I don't > think that renaming the compiler binary just for this particular case > is the right approach. Since the same compiler executable cannot run on the other platforms, I think naming them differently is reasonable. In general, I'd take the debian architecture scheme as measure. _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel