Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-arm (47 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-arm] Growing some openSUSE ARMs
On Fri, 2011-09-30 at 14:11 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 28.09.2011, at 12:50, Steve McIntyre wrote:

On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 06:31:51PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 27.09.2011, at 18:19, Steve McIntyre wrote:

Out of curiosity, what are you using as a triplet for your
port? The discussion at LPC focussed on this to some extent:

Ah, nice. I didn't find that mail before. I only found one where
discussion on the target names "armhf" and "armv7hl" was raised, so
we named the target "armv7hl" to be compatible with Fedora and

Fair enough, the internal name doesn't matter much. :-)

Well, it actually does matter because rpm compares it with the output
of uname to check if the architecture is compatible. However, if we
call it "armv7hl", we are incompatible with armv7l which logically
would be missing VFP capabilities. Now, uname unfortunately only emits
armv7l (see arch/arm/mm/proc-v7.S), so we never know if our host is
capable of running armv7hl code.

Any host with an armv7l kernel is *capable* of running armv7hl code (in
v7 [A profile], vfp hardware must be present). Since kernel doesn't
dictate the userspace API standard, it's impossible to select
hardfp/softfp based on uname -- the kernel will work with either. In
fact, we can and do mix the APIs on one system (by fiddling the LD paths
and/or using chroot to prevent cross-API linking).

The real question is "what is the API variant of the binaries and
libraries installed on the host?", which cannot be answered by querying
the CPU or the kernel.


To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-arm+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-arm+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >
List Navigation