[erlang-bugs] Erlang/OTP R11B-3 OpenBSD patches
Thu Feb 15 17:30:34 CET 2007
Jon Olsson writes:
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 04:52:16PM +0100, Mikael Pettersson wrote:
> > While this may solve your immediate problem (64-bit mode code
> > on OpenBSD/SPARC64), it's inappropriate for other cases: What
> > if the user prefers to generate 32-bit code on OpenBSD? What
> > about other operating systems on SPARC64?
> For the record:
> core% uname -a
> OpenBSD xxx.yyy.com 4.0 GENERIC#999 sparc64
> core% gcc -m32 z.c
> cc1: error: -m32 is not supported by this configuration
> I guess this means OpenBSD doesn't support 32 bit code compilation
> on sparc64? Correct me if I'm wrong.
Well, this particular gcc cannot generate 32-bit mode code.
But that's an exception: gcc is usually configured as a
"bi-arch" compiler that can generate either 32-bit or 64-bit
code, and many 64-bit systems make 32-bit code the default.
It's certainly possible that OpenBSD on SPARC64 has completely
banned all 32-bit mode code, making your change OK for OpenBSD.
But even if they have done that, inferring 64-bitness from the
C compiler instead of `uname` is a safer and more general solution.
More information about the erlang-bugs