Subject: Re: CVS commit: pkgsrc/multimedia/x264-devel
To: None <>
From: Gilles Dauphin <>
List: tech-pkg
Date: 02/24/2006 15:45:48
> From:
> To:
> Subject: Re: CVS commit: pkgsrc/multimedia/x264-devel
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 10:02:52AM +0100, Gilles Dauphin wrote:
> > > > because 'generic' solaris MACHINE_ARCH is i386 and don't take care of 
> > > > Second, x86_64 Solaris MACHINE_ARCH does not exist in pkgsrc.
> > > > maybe it is also true for other system with bi-arch (32/64) ABI.
> > > 
> > > Solaris platform files should fix up the MACHINE_ARCH in that case.
> > > A lot of packages will be broken by this because everyone else does not
> > > use i386 for the 64bit ABI.
> > 
> > If it does not use i386 for 64 bit ABI, it fall into the elif part
> > and use the correct x86 assembler (yasm). Is it wrong? 
> That's not the problem. I object this because it means we have to
> special case *every* i386/x86_64 decision in pkgsrc for the sake of
> Solaris, when it could as well just provide a sensible MACHINE_ARCH.

I think this request to Sun is not for tomorow ;)
I think pkgsrc is able to handle it in mk/platform/ like that:
	if ABI == 64 && MACHINE_ARCH == i386 then MACHINE_ARCH=amd64

> I believe that you will see this kind of problems all over the place, as
> soon as assembly is concerned, when most programs already support either
> amd64 or x86_64 correctly.

Yes I see, that's what I am doing. My wish is pkgsrc support amd64bit mode
for solaris. I have more than 3000 packages for Solaris/amd64.
I want more, one of my problem is what you pointed , the assembly code.
mplayer is now packaged with this (unwanted) kind of patch.

> Beside that, the patch is incorrect in that assumes that ABI is defined
> at all, which is not the case on almost any platform pkgsrc supports.

ABI?= 32 or 64
somewhere in mk/platform/*.mk

Am i mad?