Re: port-sparc64/51925 (The sparc/sparc64 ports consider EM_SPARC32PLUS equivalent to EM_SPARCV9)

[Guillem Jover <guillem%debian.org@localhost>]

The following reply was made to PR port-sparc64/51925; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Guillem Jover <guillem%debian.org@localhost>
To: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost
Cc: martin%NetBSD.org@localhost, port-sparc64-maintainer%netbsd.org@localhost,
	netbsd-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost, gnats-admin%netbsd.org@localhost
Subject: Re: port-sparc64/51925 (The sparc/sparc64 ports consider
 EM_SPARC32PLUS equivalent to EM_SPARCV9)
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2017 04:47:55 +0100

 Hi!
 
 On Tue, 2017-01-31 at 16:14:50 +0000, martin%NetBSD.org@localhost wrote:
 > Synopsis: The sparc/sparc64 ports consider EM_SPARC32PLUS equivalent to EM_SPARCV9
 > 
 > Responsible-Changed-From-To: port-sparc64-maintainer->martin
 > Responsible-Changed-By: martin%NetBSD.org@localhost
 > Responsible-Changed-When: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 16:14:50 +0000
 > Responsible-Changed-Why:
 > Fixed, thanks for the report!
 > 
 > 
 > State-Changed-From-To: open->closed
 > State-Changed-By: martin%NetBSD.org@localhost
 > State-Changed-When: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 16:14:50 +0000
 > State-Changed-Why:
 > I fixed it
 
 Thanks! But I see you only modified the sparc64 tree. A similar entry
 can be found in the sparc port, and although that one will just
 fall through to an error case (I assume), it seems confusing given the
 comment underneath. Also I think this is what caused the issue in the
 sparc64, as the sparc tree was imported as a clone initially? So
 fixing this would probably also avoid further confusion. :)
 
 For reference, I'm talking about the following code:
 
   ,--- sys/arch/sparc/include/elf_machdep.h ---
   #define	ELF64_MACHDEP_ENDIANNESS	ELFDATA2MSB
   #define	ELF64_MACHDEP_ID_CASES					\
   		case EM_SPARC32PLUS:					\
   		case EM_SPARCV9:					\
   		/* no 64-bit ELF machine types supported */
   `---
 
 Thanks,
 Guillem