[Rpm-maint] AArch64 support
notting at redhat.com
Thu Feb 21 13:27:47 UTC 2013
Mark Salter (msalter at redhat.com) said:
> > > Honestly, I'm looking at it from a Fedora perspective where the decision
> > > was made to not support multilib for AArch64. AArch64 h/w may be able to
> > > support 32-bit armv8 (AArch32) execution, so non-Fedora folk may have
> > > different opinions about multilib.
> > But isn't it enough to don't include aarch32 in the arch_compat list?
> > Why also mess with canoncolor?
> The patch I posted was mostly the result of cloning ia64 bits because
> ia64 was 64-bit only even though it could support ia32. But leaving that
> aside, let's say we use canoncolor=3 for aarch64. It doesn't look like
> arch_compat would help in excluding aarch32. Maybe _transaction_color?
ia64 was disturbingly 'special' in that the code was never run natively
(either in a separate chip grafted into a package, or via a custom
emulator), complete with magic path translation in the kernel. Anything
involving copying an aspect of ia64 is dangerous.
I would include 32-bit in arch_compat in the RPM upstream code, and Fedora
can always either disable/patch it, or just never ship/build 32-bit code
in their 64-bit release.
More information about the Rpm-maint