Fwd: About the names of CPUs and architectures

[Magnus Ihse Bursie]

On 2012-06-18 14:07, David Holmes wrote:
> Magnus,
>
> You need to clarify exactly in what context you plan to make these 
> changes. For example, i386 is the "libarch" name for 32-bit x86 and it 
> probably has to remain the same for backward compatibility.

Of course. I tried to be clear about this but appearantly didn't succeed. :)

Things that need to remain the same due to backwards compatibility needs 
to remain the same. I don't want to change that.

My proposal was for everything that we can (easily) change, most 
typically in the newly written code in the new build-infra system, but 
potentially older stuff that don't affect backward compatibility if it's 
easy to fix (I don't count moving files around as "easy to fix"). I most 
of all wanted to set a standard for going forward.

Second, I wanted to combine all the logic for "legacy" names in one 
place and make it clear; and hopefully get it as simple as possible, 
instead of having the "conversion" spread out across the system. My 
vision was to just list explicit exceptions to the (new) rule, like "for 
x86_64, the libarch is named amd64".

Hope that clear things up!

And thank you for your list of where the different platform names are 
used. I didn't know about all of them (like the i486.make file).

/Magnus