Message74515
> It is not documented anywhere but in the code
These also appear in file names of bdist commands, right? So I think it
should be documented.
> We (Bob Ippolitto and I) had some discussion about the architecture
> strings when
> we were working on support for universal binaries and rejected my
> initial suggestion
> of using "i386,ppc" instead of "fat" because that would be unwieldy.
OK. I wonder how you will call fat 64-bit binaries (i.e. ppc64 and
amd64), but I can live with that semantics as long as it's documented
(I actually question that it is documented in the code. If somebody
would put "-arch Itanium" in her CFLAGS, which might be supported in
10.9, it would infer that the architecture is "fat"). |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2008-10-08 06:55:34 | loewis | set | recipients:
+ loewis, ronaldoussoren |
2008-10-08 06:55:33 | loewis | link | issue4064 messages |
2008-10-08 06:55:32 | loewis | create | |
|