[M3devel] 64bit big-endian
jay.krell at cornell.edu
Tue Sep 17 23:05:39 CEST 2013
SPARC32_SOLARIS is a new name for SOLsun/SOLgnu.
Newer targets have followed a fairly "regular" naming scheme:
PPC_DARWIN, I386_DARWIN, PPC_LINUX, AMD64_NT.
Not sure if it should be PPC or PPC32, SPARC or SPARC32,
I386 or X86 or IA32 or what, but ok.
I introduced new names for the remaining few old style names:
LINUXLIBC6 => I386_LINUX
FreeBSD4 => I386_FREEBSD
NT386 => I386_NT
NT386GNU => I386_CYGWIN
NetBSDv2 => I386_NETBSD
The old names continue to be supported.
We don't really need/want to encode precise versions in the names.
See, it used to be there was a roughly one to one processor to OS mapping.
So "HPPA" implied HPUX, NetBSD/Linux/FreeBSD implied x86.
This is no longer the case at all -- pretty much every system, except
like AIX and Irix run on at least two processors.
Our build infrastructure:
Most likely I tested most/everything with gcc, but then settled on Sun cc.
User can go and edit the config files if he prefers gcc.
We have access to the opencsw machines for Solaris.
I had a bunch of machines but I've downsized 1) what I own 2) what I'm running
on what I have left.
Olaf was the main person maintaining the infrastructure and he has little time.
We are very short staffed.
There is actually very little target-dependent anywhere in the Modula-3 system at this point.
I removed all the rewritten Posix headers for example, replaced with a more portable layer.
(i.e. no need to know exact layout and sizes of things).
> Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 18:33:09 +0000
> From: microcode at zoho.com
> To: m3devel at elegosoft.com
> Subject: Re: [M3devel] 64bit big-endian
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 06:24:58PM +0000, Jay K wrote:
> > Historically:
> > SOLgnu was 32bit SPARC on Solaris using gcc; Which linker? I don't know.
> > SOLsun was 32bit SPARC on Solaris using Sun cc
> Ok, that's what I suspected vis a vis gcc/cc but I didn't know what
> platform. Thanks. So what's the reason for SPARC32_Solaris?
> > The config files can be fairly user edited to switch between cc and gcc.
> > Any of the four AMD64/I386/SPARC32/SPARC64_SOLARIS can be built with cc or gcc.
> > I favor cc. It likely gives us better code, and gives us a little
> > variety-for-demonstrated-portability.
> Yes, certainly if you're building on Solaris then Solaris Studio (cc) is the
> obvious correct choice.
> So what about 5 and 6 below? Are they built with gcc or Solaris Studio?
> And is there an issue of not having access to SPARC build hardware?
> > >
> > > Looking at the uploaded archives page, can anybody please explain the
> > > difference between all these versions and exactly what each one is?
> > >
> > > 1. Target Platform AMD64_SOLARIS
> > > 2. Target Platform I386_SOLARIS
> > > 3. Target Platform SOLgnu
> > > 4. Target Platform SOLsun
> > > 5. Target Platform SPARC32_SOLARIS
> > > 6. Target Platform SPARC64_SOLARIS
> > >
> > > 1 and 2 would seem obvious enough except that the existence of 3 and 4
> > > suggests 1 and 2 may have been built with gcc or Solaris Studio. That means
> > > 1 and 2 aren't obvious anymore, nor are 3 or 4. All I can tell from this is
> > > 1 and 2 are 64 and 32 bit versions for Solaris Intel and 5 and 6 are 32 and
> > > 64 bit versions for Solaris SPARC. I don't know what architecture 3 and 4
> > > are designed to run on. 5 and 6 would seem obvious except now we're back to
> > > wondering whether they were built with gcc or Solaris Studio.
> > >
> > > I didn't understand Jay's comment below. Do you guys not have Solaris SPARC
> > > boxes in your build farm?
> > >
> > > Thank you.
> > >
> > > Israel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the M3devel