From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/7032 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rich Felker Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: What would make musl 1.2? Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2015 21:21:50 -0500 Message-ID: <20150214022150.GI23507@brightrain.aerifal.cx> References: <20150213074603.GA975@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20150214000655.GB1452@newbook> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1423880531 17208 80.91.229.3 (14 Feb 2015 02:22:11 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2015 02:22:11 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-7045-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Sat Feb 14 03:22:11 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YMSN0-0001R2-HF for gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2015 03:22:10 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 9947 invoked by uid 550); 14 Feb 2015 02:22:08 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 9877 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2015 02:22:03 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150214000655.GB1452@newbook> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Original-Sender: Rich Felker Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:7032 Archived-At: On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 12:06:56AM +0000, Isaac Dunham wrote: > On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 11:09:55AM +0000, Justin Cormack wrote: > > mips n32 - this seems to have mostly bypassed linux and android alas, > > with only gentoo supporting it, despite the o32 ABI being horrible. > > But Musl users should be encouraged to use n32 if building form > > scratch... > > I've looked repeatedly, but everything I found has seemed to imply > that n32 is like x32: a "32-bit" ABI that requires 64-bit hardware. > Is this incorrect? Yes, that's what it is. Interestingly they avoided some of the huge mistakes of x32, but I think that was largely a consequence of having most or all of the kernel n32 types match the plain 32-bit types (sadly including, if I'm not mistaken, 32-bit time_t) rather than being a crazy mix. Someone who knows n32 better could probably clarify this. If I remember correctly, the Loongson mips64-based laptops use n32, probably because mips is painfully underpowered for a laptop/desktop even without doubling the memory bus pressure with 64-bit pointers. Rich