From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2009 00:23:20 +0300 From: Alexey Tourbin To: ALT Linux Team development discussions Message-ID: <20091223212320.GB9864@altlinux.org> Mail-Followup-To: ALT Linux Team development discussions References: <20091221154028.9681B2D7602E@ssh.git.orion.altlinux.org> <20091221233616.GN9864@altlinux.org> <20091222080556.GP9864@altlinux.org> <20091222181849.GB23811@wo.int.altlinux.org> <20091222185423.GS9864@altlinux.org> <20091223191938.GZ9864@altlinux.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="1nHxr/DJDVCa1lM8" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [devel] forced noarch X-BeenThere: devel@lists.altlinux.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: ALT Linux Team development discussions List-Id: ALT Linux Team development discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2009 21:23:20 -0000 Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Post: --1nHxr/DJDVCa1lM8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 10:33:37PM +0200, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > Can you specify a package (from the list) which is identical on i586 > > and x86_64, but should not be made noarch because it assumes e.g. > > little-endian architecture? >=20 > At least all packages which contain GNU message catalog files(*.mo): It's a well-known special case: little-endian and big-endian *.mo files can be used interchangeably (with small overhead for non-native byte order). Otherwise we can't put them under /usr/share in the first place! > $ for p in `cat ~/tmp/force-noarch`; do rpm -qpl $p | grep -q > '^/usr/share/locale/.*\.mo' && echo $p ; done > Who knows what else. Dmitry Levin pointed out the cpuburn package... > > i586 and x86_64 are "different enough" except for endianness. > > Look how they are different: > > 1) file paths are different (lib - lib64); > > 2) native binaries are different (elf32 - elf64); > > 3) sizeof(void*) =3D=3D sizeof(long) is different. > > > > How they are common: > > 1) sizeof(int) is the same (32 bit), > > 2) both are little endian. > > Which means that certain host data structures (and thus certain binary > > file formats) might have the same representation. =2E.. which gives another "bad similarity" between the two platforms: 3) Though native binaries are different, x86_64 can execute i586 code "almost natively", and x86_64 gcc has limited support for compiling i586 code. --1nHxr/DJDVCa1lM8 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAksyikgACgkQfBKgtDjnu0ZBTACbBBHuhqPv776Arm+2AUQf9g2A M3IAniJULuMTnklZjEXppVbzAoJhNMj6 =IF9l -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --1nHxr/DJDVCa1lM8--