harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Geir Magnusson Jr." <g...@pobox.com>
Subject Re: [general] Harmony enabling at Windows / x86_64
Date Tue, 20 Feb 2007 13:53:22 GMT

On Feb 20, 2007, at 7:24 AM, Gregory Shimansky wrote:

> Ivan Zvolsky wrote:
>> On 2/19/07, Gregory Shimansky <gshimansky@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Ivan Zvolsky wrote:
>>> > I have also put my efforts with drlvm building to HARMONY-3196.  
>>> The
>>> patch
>>> > makes drlvm buildable on windows/em64t (and shouldn't break  
>>> building on
>>> > other platforms).
>>> >
>>> > It still has some things to do, which I described in subtasks for
>>> > HARMONY-3196.
>>>
>>> I looked at the patches and I have a question. You've added amd64
>>> architecture in some select statements in the build along with em64t
>>> flag. I thought that from the build point they are equivalent, and
>>> build.arch property is defined in build.xml for all kinds of arch
>>> (x86_64, em64t, amd64) to be equal to "em64t". Why add another  
>>> flag in
>>> build files?
>> I can't remember why I added this. But I just tried to modify all  
>> selects
>> like "em64t,amd64" to simply "em64t" and the build worked fine.  
>> What is the
>> best option to do:
>> 1) should I replace drlvm_build_system.patch with newer version?
>> 2) or add newer version without removing the old one?
>> 3) or prepare a patch for drlvm_build_system.patch file?
>
> I'll take care about it myself. I'll remove all amd64 flags.  
> Converting em64t to x86_64 may be done later separately from  
> enabling x86_64 windows.

If you are going to be doing it anyway, why not convert to "x86_64"?

geir

>
>>> On 2/16/07, Ivan Zvolsky <i.zvolsky@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> Hello,
>>> >>
>>> >> Some time ago, I found out that Harmony is not buildable on  
>>> Windows /
>>> >> x86_64 (EM64T).
>>> >> I tried to reanimate at least the build which has required to  
>>> update
>>> both
>>> >> classlib and drlvm build files, create stubs for some  
>>> functions, etc.
>>> >>
>>> >> I've put my results (for now only classlib part) to HARMONY-3188.
>>> >> Could someone take a look? The comments are welcome.
>>> >>
>>> >> In particular, Geir might want to look at the first comment in  
>>> the
>>> >> description :)
>>> >>
>>> >> Thanks,
>>> >> Ivan
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Gregory
>>>
>>>
>
>
> -- 
> Gregory
>


Mime
View raw message