On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 02:16:47PM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Thursday, November 17, 2011 12:43:12 pm Ken Smith wrote:
> > If you're referring to the FTP directory tree layout we wind up with:
> > .../releases/amd64/9.0-RELEASE
> > .../releases/amd64/ISO-IMAGES/9.0
> > for an example of uname -m == uname -p. But for our two powerpc related
> > architectures we get:
> > .../releases/powerpc/9.0-RELEASE
> > .../releases/powerpc/ISO-IMAGES/9.0
> > .../releases/powerpc/powerpc64/9.0-RELEASE
> > .../releases/powerpc/powerpc64/ISO-IMAGES/9.0
> > I'm not sure I like the inconsistency.
> Given the available tradeoffs I prefer this to amd64/amd64. We could also
> define the rule another way, which is if a given TARGET only has a single
> TARGET_ARCH you just use TARGET, otherwise you use TARGET/TARGET_ARCH.
If we seem to employ some naming transition rule based on TARGET_ARCH and
TARGET, why not simply check just for pc98 as I suggested earlier, and
return TARGET in this case, and TARGET_ARCH otherwise?
Generalizing, perhaps this rule can be extended to the list of
TARGET/TARGET_ARCH combos for which we return TARGET, and TARGET_ARCH for
(This is for ISO file names; for release directory structure John's
suggestion looks reasonable.)