From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <gentoo-dev+bounces-95236-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org> Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B3E74139360 for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 18:14:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5C065E0823; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 18:14:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 815E3E081B for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 18:13:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: (nullmailer pid 6323 invoked by uid 1000); Wed, 11 Aug 2021 18:13:55 -0000 Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2021 13:13:55 -0500 From: William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org> To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Plans for a Gentoo/LoongArch port Message-ID: <YRQTY8P3/LF0RKAP@linux1.home> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <b008ca13-896a-0a8f-3e9d-1be07cdd65d4@xen0n.name> Precedence: bulk List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org> List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org> List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org> X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="B+vmHOvyQMUlefyD" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <b008ca13-896a-0a8f-3e9d-1be07cdd65d4@xen0n.name> X-Archives-Salt: b344eb75-1ee1-42ba-bae4-f0fe2cbcc04e X-Archives-Hash: f4a52cbedf6761c73cd56ce4bcfba20b --B+vmHOvyQMUlefyD Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 12:39:33AM +0800, WANG Xuerui wrote: > I'm planning to take ARCH=3Dloongarch for the port; and support the LP64 = ABI > first. I'd like to support both LP64 and ILP32 ABIs, but that's not a > priority. >=20 > The ABI flag might be named "ABI_LOONGARCH" but that's IMO a bit long (pun > semi-intended); ARCH=3Dloong and ABI_LOONG might be better, I'm open to > suggestions. FWIW, I like loong and ABI_LOONG better, or even better would be to use the string `uname -m` returns for the hardware as ARCH and as the suffix for ABI_. William --B+vmHOvyQMUlefyD Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iF0EABECAB0WIQTVeuxEZo4uUHOkQAluVBb0MMRlOAUCYRQTXgAKCRBuVBb0MMRl OAnMAKC5aTLmlSYuXPoIpVCfonfPVByg8gCeKtBxTLyyGflKjkNcQ7p5MfeWijM= =pooJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --B+vmHOvyQMUlefyD--