Darren J Moffat wrote: > Roland Mainz wrote: > > The trouble is that this increases the workload of a simple "make > > OS/Net+SFWNV 64bit clean by switching to 64bit binaries on 64bit-only > > platforms" by a factor of at least _three_ (delivering twice the number > > of binaries, do the matching testing _and_ implementing packaging > > changes (and the testing for it)). > > So is this important or not ? If it is important then please provide a > spec for what you propose and explain where the value is.
The value in this case would be that the Solaris userland could support platforms which are 64bit only. At one point OpenSolaris.org&&Sun try to encourage people to start new ports but on the other side such projects have a very hard time since they have to implement artificial 32bit support first (if this is possible, e.g. some hardware architectures simply cannot support 32bit and we already lost a port in the initial stages after the interested party realised that they have to do the "cleanup" themselves) to get the userland running. As a (nice) side-effect we get some abilities from the 64bit land, e.g. high-resolution timestamps, the abilty to process more than 2GB of memory within the application itself etc. ... but my main interest is to get the code 64bit clean. > Note I'm not saying I object I just sill haven't seen an actual spec and > this is wasting your time and the time of ARC members by continuing to > try and discuss this case without a proper spec. Please work with your > case sponsor to get a proper detailed spec in place and lets start with > a fasttrack. I'll try to build one with Plocher... > > This is technically ARC'able but no > > longer implementable for a single contributor (at least not if we intend > > to crawl over both trees and clean them up). > > I don't see any reason why it isn't implementable by a single > contributor and in any case that isn't relevant for the architecture review. It is relevant for ARC to come up with a working architecture and _not_ force people or teams to boil the ocean in one large step (preferably I want only to work on the _code_ and get it tested without dealing with the package system at all (at least it's serious problem with SFWNV which currently doesn't support incremental rebuilds and therefore eating up engineering time (I'm trying to fix that but it will need some time until I reach that point in my ToDo list))) ... In the meantime I have another question: A couple of people pointed out it may be the case that ARC doesn't even need to be involved in such a project at all since the ARC'ed interfaces don't change (unless the binaries are explicitly labelled as "32bit" in an ARC case (which is usually not the case)) ... ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz at nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 (;O/ \/ \O;)
