Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
On Friday 02 September 2005 06:28, Lance Albertson wrote: Grant Goodyear wrote: Christian Parpart wrote: [Thu Sep 01 2005, 05:45:43PM CDT] This just leads me to assume you're not really a coder (wrt native programming languages like C/C++), are you? *Grin* This sort of condescending attitude is rarely wise when it comes to dealing with Gentoo devs. Not only does it tend to annoy people (yes, I'm a tad annoyed by the presumption), but since you're still relatively new here the odds are that people know the person you're being condescending to better than they know you, and thus it just makes you look bad if you're wrong. Feel free to ask people what I do for a living, and whether they suspect that I know the difference between a 64-bit pointer and a 32-bit int. Ha! Yeah ... kids these days... just don't respect their elders like they should ;-). I have seen more and more 'newish' devs speaking their minds like this without even knowing/asking the person. I guess respect and tactfulness isn't being taught anymore... And yes, Grant definitely knows the difference :-) Maybe I do not understand the diffference between I assume and I know, and I know I meant the first, however, in that case, Grant, I do not know why you're requesting this combine when you know about these issues already. Don't get me wrong, I am (though, I was) just curious, and really surprised how the hell ppl (telling to be coders) can even think about such merges. It might - of course - *somehow* still be possible, but I just do not believe in, as I posted earlier (by example). And just like kintaco said, there're not only ppl outside that do know why those archs are different, there're also ppl outside that even make use of such things on *their* main arch (x86) and do not care (or did) about 64bit compats, in fact, most do not know that this piece of could would lead into semantic errors on such archs anyway. As said, don't get me wrong, I'm neither new (depends on definition!) nor am I missing respect. I was just sharing some by-example snippets why this is a bad idea, and I was just assuming (not know) why I said what I said. Regards, Christian Parpart. pgp0pZlV2YJFY.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
On Sun, 4 Sep 2005 11:08:58 +0200 Christian Parpart [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Maybe I do not understand the diffference between I assume and I | know, and I know I meant the first, however, in that case, Grant, | I do not know why you're requesting this combine when you know about | these issues already. Probably because he understands both the 32/64 issues and the portage side of things far better than you do. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm pgpvz73g1sVLp.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
Grant Goodyear wrote: The recent discussion about having a real x86 arch team and combining the x86 and amd64 keywords was both interesting and provocative. Of course, this is the sort of thing that the GLEP system was meant for. Now that we have a new council that (I hope) will be active in approving or rejecting GLEPs, perhaps someone should be writing a GLEP about combining x86 and amd64? Are you volunteering? :P -- Andrew Gaffneyhttp://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/ Gentoo Linux Developer Installer Project -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
Grant Goodyear wrote: Now that we have a new council that (I hope) will be active in approving or rejecting GLEPs, perhaps someone should be writing a GLEP about combining x86 and amd64? I'm not sure if it's really worth writing another GLEP for an april's fool... -- Simon Stelling Gentoo/AMD64 Operational Co-Lead [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
On Thursday 01 September 2005 19:10, Grant Goodyear wrote: Now that we have a new council that (I hope) will be active in approving or rejecting GLEPs, perhaps someone should be writing a GLEP about combining x86 and amd64? I hope this not. As (iirc) I already said, it's impossible to combine x86 with anything else that's not 100% source and binary compatible with itself... The reason is actually simple: x86 is, or at least was, the reference architecture for almost all programmers. There are too many packages that works *just* on x86, both at source and binary level. Using a single keyword would make us unable to mark for example helixplayer (source) x86 and -amd64 at the same time (as it's now). While it can be simple to do for sparc or ppc that has relatively less users, and with no need for binary compatibility for -bin packages, it's probably going to be a *great* pain for both users AND developers of x86 and amd64 platforms (most probably for the latter, as x86 has basically no needs for multilib and so on). Please don't do that. -- Diego Flameeyes Pettenò Gentoo Developer - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/ (Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, Gentoo/AMD64, Sound, PAM) pgpVVtvLfexL0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
Simon Stelling wrote: Grant Goodyear wrote: Now that we have a new council that (I hope) will be active in approving or rejecting GLEPs, perhaps someone should be writing a GLEP about combining x86 and amd64? I'm not sure if it's really worth writing another GLEP for an april's fool... Gnah, forgot to include the link: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/26749/match=glep+amd64 You probably want to reuse this one, if you really like the idea, I for sure don't. -- Simon Stelling Gentoo/AMD64 Operational Co-Lead [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
Using a single keyword would make us unable to mark for example helixplayer (source) x86 and -amd64 at the same time (as it's now). So package.mask it in the (now hypothetical) amd64 sub-profile, and it is fixed. -Steve -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
I hope this not. As (iirc) I already said, it's impossible to combine x86 with anything else that's not 100% source and binary compatible with itself... The reason is actually simple: x86 is, or at least was, the reference architecture for almost all programmers. Witih amd64 becoming so widespread, this will change. There are too many packages that works *just* on x86, both at source and binary level. Doesn't the amd64 team have a set of 32-bit compat libs just to run binary packages? When running 32-bit code, isn't amd64 basically just a glorified athlon-xp? -Steve -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
On Thursday 01 September 2005 19:39, Stephen P. Becker wrote: Witih amd64 becoming so widespread, this will change. You think it's a thing that changes in 2 days? Doesn't the amd64 team have a set of 32-bit compat libs just to run binary packages? When running 32-bit code, isn't amd64 basically just a glorified athlon-xp? Kernel-level code doesn't work. Some 32-bit binaries fails to work, and the emul-libs are NOT a way to say it's 32-bit... There are TOO many differences... About p.mask.. no I don't like that solution, p.mask is good for a platform profile (for example bsd's, darwin's or linux's), but not to arch level, we have -* keywords for that, haven't we? -- Diego Flameeyes Pettenò Gentoo Developer - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/ (Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, Gentoo/AMD64, Sound, PAM) pgpbOvvCsaM1c.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
Simon Stelling wrote: Stephen P. Becker wrote: Using a single keyword would make us unable to mark for example helixplayer (source) x86 and -amd64 at the same time (as it's now). So package.mask it in the (now hypothetical) amd64 sub-profile, and it is fixed. That's exactly why i don't like the idea of merging keywords: You loose the ~arch state. We weren't talking about ~arch, we were talking about -arch. Also, you can't compare sparc32/sparc64 to x86/amd64: sparc64 is just a 64bit kernel with a 32bit userland. For users who want that, there is already a keyword: x86. Wrong again. On mips, we have 64-bit kernels with *three* different possible userlands, n64, n32, and o32, and we do just fine (although as of right now, we haven't bothered to make any n64 stages since they would run slower than n32 and o32 on all of our supported hardware). -Steve -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
On Thursday 01 September 2005 01:39 pm, Stephen P. Becker wrote: I hope this not. As (iirc) I already said, it's impossible to combine x86 with anything else that's not 100% source and binary compatible with itself... The reason is actually simple: x86 is, or at least was, the reference architecture for almost all programmers. Witih amd64 becoming so widespread, this will change. will != now maybe down the road i'd be for this, but right now i think it's just a waste of time ... too many packages suck at life ... just yesterday i fixed a new release (made in the last month) of a package which loved to cast pointers to 'int' and then try to use the result -mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
Also, you can't compare sparc32/sparc64 to x86/amd64: sparc64 is just a 64bit kernel with a 32bit userland. Oh yeah, I forgot, sparc32 uses a different userland than sparc64 in Gentoo. Shall I stop shooting holes in this type of argument now? :) -Steve -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 19:42:46 +0200 Simon Stelling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Also, you can't compare sparc32/sparc64 to x86/amd64: sparc64 is just a 64bit kernel with a 32bit userland. However, that can't be said of mips, where one keyword covers 32- and 64-bit kernels with three different userland ABIs, each with its own set of new and interesting bugs. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
What structure are you thinking about for the 'real' x86 arch?
would there be a meta-x86 and then two sub-archs?
ie.
--real_x86--+--x86--~x86
+--amd64--~amd64
where {real_x86}={x86}INTERSECT{amd64}.. ?
Lares
On Thu, 2005-09-01 at 12:10 -0500, Grant Goodyear wrote:
The recent discussion about having a real x86 arch team and combining
the x86 and amd64 keywords was both interesting and provocative. Of
course, this is the sort of thing that the GLEP system was meant for.
Now that we have a new council that (I hope) will be active in approving
or rejecting GLEPs, perhaps someone should be writing a GLEP about
combining x86 and amd64?
-g2boojum-
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
Stephen P. Becker wrote: The reason is actually simple: x86 is, or at least was, the reference architecture for almost all programmers. Witih amd64 becoming so widespread, this will change. That's why I have another proposal: Let's merge x86 and amd64 keywords in about 10 years, when x86 died ;) -- Simon Stelling Gentoo/AMD64 Operational Co-Lead [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
On Thu, 2005-09-01 at 13:39 -0400, Stephen P. Becker wrote: I hope this not. As (iirc) I already said, it's impossible to combine x86 with anything else that's not 100% source and binary compatible with itself... The reason is actually simple: x86 is, or at least was, the reference architecture for almost all programmers. Witih amd64 becoming so widespread, this will change. There are too many packages that works *just* on x86, both at source and binary level. Doesn't the amd64 team have a set of 32-bit compat libs just to run binary packages? When running 32-bit code, isn't amd64 basically just a glorified athlon-xp? No. It just has the same *instruction* set as an Athlon XP, plus SSE2 and even SSE3 in newer models. There's also the Intel EM64T stuff which is more like a P4 than an Athlon XP, since it has no 3Dnow! support. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead/QA Manager Games - Developer Gentoo Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
On Thu, 2005-01-09 at 19:02 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Thu, 1 Sep 2005 19:50:11 +0200 Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | On Thursday 01 September 2005 19:41, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | Untrue. | | Can I have reasoning? Take a look at how sparc and mips currently handle packages which will run on some CPU kinds or ABIs but not others. Is it just me, it seems that only sparc/mips devs want that kind of change and non none of the x86/amd64 devs... I still dont see what practical advantage that would bring to x86/amd64 users or developers? -- Olivier Crête [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo Developer x86 Security Liaison -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
On Thu, 1 Sep 2005 12:10:28 -0500 Grant Goodyear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | The recent discussion about having a real x86 arch team and | combining the x86 and amd64 keywords was both interesting and | provocative. Of course, this is the sort of thing that the GLEP | system was meant for. Now that we have a new council that (I hope) | will be active in approving or rejecting GLEPs, perhaps someone | should be writing a GLEP about combining x86 and amd64? Won't work. Too many people who don't have a clue what's being proposed and who don't understand the explanations. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm pgpR7LgHo8xrL.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 14:36:44 -0400 Olivier Crete [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Is it just me, it seems that only sparc/mips devs want that kind of | change and non none of the x86/amd64 devs... The people who have worked with such a system before and understand how it works and what all it can do want change. Those who don't understand the system and think that it has all kinds of problems that are really just a lack of understanding don't want it to change. | I still dont see what practical advantage that would bring to | x86/amd64 users or developers? QA. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm pgpkV7U5E4kw0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
On Thursday 01 September 2005 20:42, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: The people who have worked with such a system before and understand how it works and what all it can do want change. Those who don't understand the system and think that it has all kinds of problems that are really just a lack of understanding don't want it to change. The firsts includes the ones that REALLY works with x86 and amd64. The latter don't give a damn about x86 and amd64 and seems just like they want to show off how much they are better than us... QA. SNR -- Diego Flameeyes Pettenò Gentoo Developer - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/ (Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, Gentoo/AMD64, Sound, PAM) pgp7f0w636F20.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: [Thu Sep 01 2005, 01:41:22PM CDT] Won't work. Too many people who don't have a clue what's being proposed and who don't understand the explanations. Okay, with that statement, and an inability to find anybody else who really wants to write such a GLEP, I'm certainly willing to drop it. -g2boojum- -- Grant Goodyear Gentoo Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0 9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76 pgpT7K0wVex6k.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
Grant Goodyear wrote: The recent discussion about having a real x86 arch team and combining the x86 and amd64 keywords was both interesting and provocative. Of course, this is the sort of thing that the GLEP system was meant for. Now that we have a new council that (I hope) will be active in approving or rejecting GLEPs, perhaps someone should be writing a GLEP about combining x86 and amd64? -g2boojum- This will not happen. Years down the road AMD64 may absorb the remaining x86 issues, but AMD64 will certainly never be run like x86 has been. Mike Doty -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
On Thu, 2005-09-01 at 14:36 -0400, Olivier Crete wrote: On Thu, 2005-01-09 at 19:02 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Thu, 1 Sep 2005 19:50:11 +0200 Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | On Thursday 01 September 2005 19:41, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | Untrue. | | Can I have reasoning? Take a look at how sparc and mips currently handle packages which will run on some CPU kinds or ABIs but not others. Is it just me, it seems that only sparc/mips devs want that kind of change and non none of the x86/amd64 devs... No, Yes, and Yes. I still dont see what practical advantage that would bring to x86/amd64 users or developers? Well, I guess the theory might be because then you only have one keyword and one base profile to manage - I think. --- From a quick diff, it looks like they are handled via the ABI and PROFILE_ARCH stuff, but what your average sparc/mips dev do not realise, is that most x86 devs, and probably many amd64 devs have no idea what and how the ABI stuff is used. Mostly the ABI stuff was hacked by (and still is mostly if I'm not mistaken) by Jeremy, and they mostly just use ARCH or use to apply x86/amd64 patches. So your basic problem is that: 1) They have no idea how sparc/mips does it 2) They do not see any benefits 3) They get even more confused by the half assed answers they get. So to be frank, I propose that either the alt-arch devs start explaining above instead of half-assed answers and senseless ranting, or shut up. From the amount of _usefull_ comments they have given, it does not look like its really an issue or priority for them besides having some fun. Thanks, -- Martin Schlemmer signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
On Thursday 01 September 2005 20:54, Stephen P. Becker wrote: Well, merging the two arches will help solve this problem. I read this as as nobody wants to take care of x86, and we can't blame anyone because there's no one to blame, let make amd64 arch team the one to blame, as we don't have facts about x86 arch team at all. -- Diego Flameeyes Pettenò Gentoo Developer - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/ (Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, Gentoo/AMD64, Sound, PAM) pgpTpNuruxM3f.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
On Thu, 2005-09-01 at 19:42 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 14:36:44 -0400 Olivier Crete [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Is it just me, it seems that only sparc/mips devs want that kind of | change and non none of the x86/amd64 devs... The people who have worked with such a system before and understand how it works and what all it can do want change. Those who don't understand the system and think that it has all kinds of problems that are really just a lack of understanding don't want it to change. Maybe, but please give one example of such an 'explanation' that any of the pro-merge devs have given. | I still dont see what practical advantage that would bring to | x86/amd64 users or developers? QA. Possible, but once again, why will a merge give 'better' QA ? -- Martin Schlemmer signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
On Thu, 1 Sep 2005 20:54:15 +0200 Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | On Thursday 01 September 2005 20:42, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | The people who have worked with such a system before and understand | how it works and what all it can do want change. Those who don't | understand the system and think that it has all kinds of problems | that are really just a lack of understanding don't want it to | change. | The firsts includes the ones that REALLY works with x86 and amd64. The ones who are short-sighted and only understand simple non-split archs, yes. | The latter don't give a damn about x86 and amd64 and seems just like | they want to show off how much they are better than us... | | QA. | SNR Note the 'ratio' part. It isn't affected by a change in the number of users. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm pgpgXQLctwhox.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
On Thu, 2005-01-09 at 19:53 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Thu, 1 Sep 2005 20:46:46 +0200 Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | On Thursday 01 September 2005 20:32, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | Ideally they wouldn't be keyworded at all. | I live in a real world, not an ideal one. | | More users means more QA feedback. This means x86/amd64 will have an | *easier* job. | SNR, this unknown value that's so much important in communications... | this is when I like the school I did. So your argument is that our users are clueless morons? Many of the x86/amd64 user are... many like reiser4.. some even use love-sources... -- Olivier Crête [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo Developer x86 Security Liaison -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
On Thursday 01 September 2005 21:00, Martin Schlemmer wrote: Possible, but once again, why will a merge give 'better' QA ? Because you start over. You have to DO actually the QA that's missing on x86. That's true but... WHO will do that? The new merged arch team... but let my math skills try to solve this a + b = c x86 arch team + amd64 arch team = combined arch team 0 + b = b x86 arch team = 0 and this means that AMD64 arch team will have to do QA for x86, too... Yeah someone will join ... but I want to have a list of people joining before say that someone will join... -- Diego Flameeyes Pettenò Gentoo Developer - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/ (Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, Gentoo/AMD64, Sound, PAM) pgprse9xxrBFt.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
On Thursday 01 September 2005 21:09, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: Hence the GLEP proposal. Unfortunately, too many ignorant people are jumping in and spewing out nonsense about things they don't understand before the GLEP's even written... There was one, wasn't it? And I think I answered to that with some points. I have explained my reasons for not doing so today. I have received no answer to those reasons that was not QA, more eyes means better and x86 arch team, to which I already have answered... -- Diego Flameeyes Pettenò Gentoo Developer - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/ (Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, Gentoo/AMD64, Sound, PAM) pgpDcYy1i9q6x.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
Martin Schlemmer wrote: I still dont see what practical advantage that would bring to x86/amd64 users or developers? Well, I guess the theory might be because then you only have one keyword and one base profile to manage - I think. Having just one keyword won't decrease our (our as in amd64 team) workload, nor will it increase our (our as in amd64 port) QA, it will just be the other way around. What really is confusing me is that mostly sparc/mips-devs want to push us in a direction we absolutely don't like, but we're affected by all effects, not them. And what is even more confusing, is that they make statements like I don't care about x86/amd64 So to be frank, I propose that either the alt-arch devs start explaining above instead of half-assed answers and senseless ranting, or shut up. From the amount of _usefull_ comments they have given, it does not look like its really an issue or priority for them besides having some fun. So I'm not the only one feeling assed, fine. I know ABI, but only in the context of multilib. We use it to decide whether something is 32bit or 64bit. As stated above, I can see how x86 will benefit from a merge, but the damage amd64 gets seems far bigger. -- Simon Stelling Gentoo/AMD64 Operational Co-Lead [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
On Thu, 1 Sep 2005 21:19:31 +0200 Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | On Thursday 01 September 2005 21:09, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | Hence the GLEP proposal. Unfortunately, too many ignorant people are | jumping in and spewing out nonsense about things they don't | understand before the GLEP's even written... | There was one, wasn't it? And I think I answered to that with some | points. I have explained my reasons for not doing so today. No, there was an April Fool's joke. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm pgp01A17kVcdX.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
On Thu, 2005-09-01 at 21:14 +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: x86 users = a lot, most of the illiterate, ricer, ranting users.. I thought that was amd64? :P Anyway, here's what *I* propose. I propose that we all just shut up and ignore this. It's obvious that there's not going to be an agreement on it, so let's drop it until there's an actual GLEP written on it. At that point, you can argue the points of the GLEP and it won't just be useless flaming. Either that, or you can take your stand and join up to form an x86 arch team and just end the need for this discussion right now. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead/QA Manager Games - Developer Gentoo Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
On Thu, 2005-09-01 at 21:17 +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: The new merged arch team... but let my math skills try to solve this a + b = c x86 arch team + amd64 arch team = combined arch team 0 + b = b x86 arch team = 0 and this means that AMD64 arch team will have to do QA for x86, too... Hehehe... I like this explanation. It is very simple, but it does show part of the problem of such a merge. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead/QA Manager Games - Developer Gentoo Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
On Thursday 01 September 2005 21:29, Chris Gianelloni wrote: I thought that was amd64? Well.. it actually is both :) -- Diego Flameeyes Pettenò Gentoo Developer - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/ (Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, Gentoo/AMD64, Sound, PAM) pgpmVuQ8MulH5.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
On Thursday 01 September 2005 21:28, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | There was one, wasn't it? And I think I answered to that with some | points. I have explained my reasons for not doing so today. No, there was an April Fool's joke. Have to look down to the irc logs to find you said you were serious? That's why I pointed to that. If you weren't, well I'm sorry I pointed to that, please next time be more explicit with april fools... and now provide me an explaination, a solution, or something :) -- Diego Flameeyes Pettenò Gentoo Developer - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/ (Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, Gentoo/AMD64, Sound, PAM) pgprkDVbbxH1u.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: No, there was an April Fool's joke. Which pretty good shows how ridiculous such a merge would be... -- Simon Stelling Gentoo/AMD64 Operational Co-Lead [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
On 1/9/2005 20:54:14, Stephen P. Becker ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Is it just me, it seems that only sparc/mips devs want that kind of change and non none of the x86/amd64 devs... I still dont see what practical advantage that would bring to x86/amd64 users or developers? If you haven't figured out the reason we are pushing for this sort of thing yet, it is because x86 is unsupported in Gentoo (if you consider what all the other arches have to do to be supported). As a result, it causes the quality of the portage tree to suffer. Time and time again, it has been brought up that x86 should have an arch team, yet nobody ever acts on it. Well, merging the two arches will help solve this problem. Surely ths solution to that problem is to set up an x86 arch team, not to put such big a millstone around the neck of the amd64 team. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 21:42:09 +0200 Simon Stelling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | No, there was an April Fool's joke. | | Which pretty good shows how ridiculous such a merge would be... Not at all. It showed just how many silly knee-jerk reactions such a proposal would get. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm pgpIUqM8Xf7Sc.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
On Thu, 2005-09-01 at 21:14 +0100, Ian Leitch wrote: I think myself and tester are the only members who can be considered active at the moment. I'm happy with creating an arch team, though I don't think we'll end up with an abundance of members (x86 is far from the most popular arch among devs). Yeah, I added myself not too long back, but I still need to get my P4 up and running .. should be in the next week or two. Chris Gianelloni wrote: So would just making an x86 arch team. It would also be much less of a problem than merging x86 and amd64. How about this? I proclaim and x86 arch team now exists. It already has a security liason. $ cat /var/mail/alias/arch/x86 avenj solar tester port001 azarah -- Martin Schlemmer signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
I think myself and tester are the only members who can be considered active at the moment. I'm happy with creating an arch team, though I don't think we'll end up with an abundance of members (x86 is far from the most popular arch among devs). Chris Gianelloni wrote: So would just making an x86 arch team. It would also be much less of a problem than merging x86 and amd64. How about this? I proclaim and x86 arch team now exists. It already has a security liason. $ cat /var/mail/alias/arch/x86 avenj solar tester port001 azarah -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Mike, Mike Frysinger schrieb: | yes, assuming user wants that ... not everyone wants multilib crap on their | machine ... i know i'd prefer to have a 100% non-multilib system if i could | get away with it You can, we have the 'no-multilib' subprofile, and there is still hardened/amd64 which is not multilib, either. | -mike Danny - -- Danny van Dyk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo/AMD64 Project, Gentoo Scientific Project -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDF2i8aVNL8NrtU6IRAgUmAJ4n5zQAzqPYuoI3xakYxz+YLYCqIwCfZrUt L7WHl+Z77EmD+e1tkufHEbE= =0Dwc -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Ciaran McCreesh schrieb: | On Thu, 1 Sep 2005 12:10:28 -0500 Grant Goodyear [EMAIL PROTECTED] | wrote: | | The recent discussion about having a real x86 arch team and | | combining the x86 and amd64 keywords was both interesting and | | provocative. Of course, this is the sort of thing that the GLEP | | system was meant for. Now that we have a new council that (I hope) | | will be active in approving or rejecting GLEPs, perhaps someone | | should be writing a GLEP about combining x86 and amd64? | | Won't work. Too many people who don't have a clue what's being proposed | and who don't understand the explanations. Too many people out of other projects try to achieve changes they want and put them on other people's todo lists... Danny - -- Danny van Dyk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo/AMD64 Project, Gentoo Scientific Project -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDF2ohaVNL8NrtU6IRAunnAJ4zdz33d0M6HghkrD4bWV+c86454ACgo0yq 058mbbrLLtkAgMRKlZA3xJY= =gZa5 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
On Thu, 2005-01-09 at 15:25 -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote: So would just making an x86 arch team. It would also be much less of a problem than merging x86 and amd64. How about this? I proclaim and x86 arch team now exists. It already has a security liason. $ cat /var/mail/alias/arch/x86 avenj solar tester port001 azarah Seems that we even have two of our new Council members on the team. Anybody else want to join the team? Just add yourself to the alias and start paying attention to requests that are submitted to [EMAIL PROTECTED] via bugzilla. The people maintaining the x86 kernel should also join, as well as the release maintainer (chris, is that you?), the grub/lilo maintainers, etc... That would be a good start. We should also try to recruit one or two x86 arch testers, hparker has offered to help. -- Olivier Crête [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo Developer x86 Security Liaison -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
On Thu, 2005-09-01 at 12:10 -0500, Grant Goodyear wrote: The recent discussion about having a real x86 arch team and combining the x86 and amd64 keywords was both interesting and provocative. Of course, this is the sort of thing that the GLEP system was meant for. Now that we have a new council that (I hope) will be active in approving or rejecting GLEPs, perhaps someone should be writing a GLEP about combining x86 and amd64? -g2boojum- Just out of curiousity, what makes people think that the amd64 team will sit still for having all of x86 foisted off on them? -- Daniel Gryniewicz Gentoo AMD64 Team -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
Stephen P. Becker wrote: Is it just me, it seems that only sparc/mips devs want that kind of change and non none of the x86/amd64 devs... I still dont see what practical advantage that would bring to x86/amd64 users or developers? If you haven't figured out the reason we are pushing for this sort of thing yet, it is because x86 is unsupported in Gentoo (if you consider what all the other arches have to do to be supported). As a result, it causes the quality of the portage tree to suffer. You are saying that the quality of x86 stuff in the tree is worse than the other arches? -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
On Thu, 2005-09-01 at 17:05 -0400, Olivier Crete wrote: release maintainer (chris, is that you?), the grub/lilo maintainers, Currently, yes. I'll add myself to the alias. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead/QA Manager Games - Developer Gentoo Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
On Thursday 01 September 2005 19:10, Grant Goodyear wrote:
The recent discussion about having a real x86 arch team and combining
the x86 and amd64 keywords was both interesting and provocative.
aha? Not in the list, is it?
Of course, this is the sort of thing that the GLEP system was meant for.
Now that we have a new council that (I hope) will be active in approving
or rejecting GLEPs, perhaps someone should be writing a GLEP about
combining x86 and amd64?
This just leads me to assume you're not really a coder (wrt native programming
languages like C/C++), are you?
I mean, x86 (32bit) and amd64 (64bit) ARE NOT THE SAME ARCH.
This is simply demonstrated by all those ugly pointer-to-integer conversions
that often happen when you write on your legacy x86 architecture.
However, when you try to compile it on an amd64 e.g., you just can't as gcc
WILL bail out.
Having now a x86amd64-alike keyword instead of x86 and amd64 will just make
lots of user's emerge experiences pain ass.
Of course, OTOH, while our bugs db gets flooded with reports, this *could* be
a startup for us to know *what* packages needs fixing. But that way, we would
be jast far off enterprise.
Here's an example that works on x86 but *not* an amd64:
// g++ -o test32vs64bit test32vs64bit.cpp
#include cstdlib
int main() {
void *p = NULL;
unsigned u = (unsigned)p; // ok on x86; error on amd64
p = (void *)u; // ok on x86; error on amd64
return 0;
}
Of course, you might think WTF do some guy need this, but hey, programmers are
really creative, and use what the compiler accepts - I myself ran into this
while porting my apps/libs to amd64. And think of it, not everybody has the
money to grab one.
Congrats,
Christian Parpart.
pgpKwfrGKm0Ue.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
Christian Parpart wrote: [Thu Sep 01 2005, 05:45:43PM CDT] This just leads me to assume you're not really a coder (wrt native programming languages like C/C++), are you? *Grin* This sort of condescending attitude is rarely wise when it comes to dealing with Gentoo devs. Not only does it tend to annoy people (yes, I'm a tad annoyed by the presumption), but since you're still relatively new here the odds are that people know the person you're being condescending to better than they know you, and thus it just makes you look bad if you're wrong. Feel free to ask people what I do for a living, and whether they suspect that I know the difference between a 64-bit pointer and a 32-bit int. Best, g2boojum -- Grant Goodyear Gentoo Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0 9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76 pgpeDWIP2Ahm8.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64
On Thu, 2005-09-01 at 17:05 -0400, Olivier Crete wrote: On Thu, 2005-01-09 at 15:25 -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote: So would just making an x86 arch team. It would also be much less of a problem than merging x86 and amd64. How about this? I proclaim and x86 arch team now exists. It already has a security liason. $ cat /var/mail/alias/arch/x86 avenj solar tester port001 azarah Seems that we even have two of our new Council members on the team. Anybody else want to join the team? Just add yourself to the alias and start paying attention to requests that are submitted to [EMAIL PROTECTED] via bugzilla. The people maintaining the x86 kernel should also join, as well as the release maintainer (chris, is that you?), the grub/lilo maintainers, etc... That would be a good start. We should also try to recruit one or two x86 arch testers, hparker has offered to help. Be ready to test my packages has well. I'm very happy with the formation of the new x86 arch team i wish you the best and i think this is the way to improve Gentoo (QA, releases etc..). You guys need a doc writer too (catch one at #-doc) And of course i think AT's will have much work to do on the x86 team. -- Luis Medinas [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://dev.gentoo.org/~metalgod Gentoo Linux Developer: AMD64,Printing,Media-Optical -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
