[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] define _BSD_SOURCE for bktr.c

Diego Biurrun diego
Fri Dec 26 23:04:19 CET 2008


On Fri, Dec 26, 2008 at 06:58:55PM +0000, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
> Diego Biurrun <diego at biurrun.de> writes:
> 
> > On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 11:02:55PM +0000, Jacob Meuser wrote:
> >> On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 11:45:10PM +0100, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> >> > On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 04:53:50PM +0000, Jacob Meuser wrote:
> >> > > On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 11:32:03AM -0000, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
> >> > > > 
> >> > > > Diego Biurrun wrote:
> >> > > > > On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 02:50:48AM +0000, Jacob Meuser wrote:
> >> > > > >> On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 02:10:03PM +0100, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> >> > > > >> >
> >> > > > >> > The patch has 17 different hunks, hunks 5-7, 13, 14 are
> >> > > > >> > applied, hunk 8 has been explained, the rest is
> >> > > > >> > mysterious.
> >> > > > >>
> >> > > > >> (2) line 934 - use the hardware arch instead of machine arch.  this
> >> > > > >> was sent to me from another developer.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Why don't you just pass --arch=WHATEVER to configure?
> >> > > > 
> >> > > > If OpenBSD has a different mechanism for detecting the architecture,
> >> > > > I have nothing against supporting this in a clean way.  I am, however,
> >> > > > slightly confused by the hardware vs. machine distinction?  I thought
> >> > > > those words were more or less synonymous.
> >> > > 
> >> > > there are, in OpenBSD, a few differences.  I don't use any of those
> >> > > machines, but I believe, e.g. zaurus vs arm is an example, as
> >> > > well as macppc vs powerppc.
> >> > 
> >> > Could you point us at some examples or documentation?
> >> 
> >> http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=arch
> >> http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=uname
> >
> > Executive summary: 'uname' outputs the host architecture, 'arch'
> > outputs the target architecture.
> 
> What you just said makes no sense.  Those commands always report
> characteristics of the machine on which they run; cross-compiling is
> irrelevant here.
> 
> I think the answer is that the BSD uname reports the system type
> rather than the CPU architecture, e.g. pc instead of x86.  The
> standard is sufficiently vague ("the name of the hardware type") that
> an implementation can get away with this, annoying though it may be.
> 
> GNU coreutils includes an "arch" command documented as being
> equivalent to "uname -m".

FWIW, on my Debian system, 'arch' is part of the util-linux package.
However, for whatever reason, it's only present on the Debian stable
box, the Debian testing box no longer has it...

> Do we know of a system with an "arch" command doing something else
> entirely?  If not, we could simply try both.

That might work, yes.

Diego




More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list