On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 7:05 PM, Brendan Conoboy <blc(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On 03/20/2012 10:44 AM, drago01 wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Brendan Conoboy<blc(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>> Please, please, no. Cross compilation for Fedora cannot and will not
>> get a secondary arch to primary. We're talking man-decades of
>> time to solve all the problems. Decades.
> Sorry I am not buying that.
Because you have vast experience to the contrary?
No I do believe that there is some work required to do it. But
*man-decades* is just an overstatement.
Look, even x86_64 is
topping out on speed and moving to a more-core and more-systems-per-rack
I didn't claim otherwise ...
Cross compilation solves yesterday's problem, not tomorrow's.
Not really no. Even if we get ARM up to reasonable speeds it could
help other arches in the future.
build speed truly is a fundamental issue to becoming PA the answer is to
harness multiple systems for a single build, not to use a somewhat faster
system to make up for the speed of a somewhat slower system.
Sure if you can solve the problem in a different way it is fine. I
just said then when I did software development on ARM building the
software on an x86_64 host was the only obvious choice.
So it sounds logical to apply it here where the goal is to build a
*whole operating system* and not just a specific program. (OK hardware
advanced since then but still).
more cores than fit in a single SMP Linux environment is the only sensible
approach to future build speedups.
Fine I am not going to stop you from doing that.
Though is an interesting challenge, it
is completely beyond the scope of primary architecture requirements.
Please, let's drop talk of cross compilation.
As I said in the other mail I am fine with that. I just had to respond
to the "man-decades" hyperbole. (Maybe I should have just ignored it).