* Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Plans for a Gentoo/LoongArch port
@ 2021-08-24 3:30 99% ` WANG Xuerui
0 siblings, 0 replies; 1+ results
From: WANG Xuerui @ 2021-08-24 3:30 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
On 8/12/21 14:39, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 12 Aug 2021, Michał Górny wrote:
>> On Thu, 2021-08-12 at 09:21 +0800, WANG Xuerui wrote:
>>> I would say this is mostly aesthetic matter, because we have equally
>>> long ARCH names like "microblaze" or "openrisc" too. From a user's
>>> perspective I'd personally prefer "loong" to save some typing, but
>>> "loongarch" wouldn't hurt that much either.
>> I think following upstream (i.e. "loongarch" convention) is better.
>> We have already caused some mess with custom names like "arm64".
> Can we please keep these identifiers short? Currently all ARCH names are
> 5 characters at most (except prefix, of course). The total length of the
> KEYWORDS line isn't the main issue here, but tools like eshowkw or
> tables in the various web interfaces.
>
> It is also in GLEP 53 if you need a formal reference:
> "Note that no limit on the length of both fields in the keyword are
> imposed. However, we cannot overemphasize our preference to keep
> keywords small and sensible."
It seems the discussion has gone quiet for a while now, so I take that
we choose ARCH=loong over ARCH=loongarch according to GLEP 53?
If that doesn't receive much objection, I'll prepare and send the first
few eclass patches soon.
> Ulrich
^ permalink raw reply [relevance 99%]
Results 1-1 of 1 | reverse | options above
-- pct% links below jump to the message on this page, permalinks otherwise --
2021-08-11 16:39 [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Plans for a Gentoo/LoongArch port WANG Xuerui
2021-08-11 18:13 ` William Hubbs
2021-08-12 1:21 ` WANG Xuerui
2021-08-12 6:00 ` Michał Górny
2021-08-12 6:39 ` Ulrich Mueller
2021-08-24 3:30 99% ` WANG Xuerui
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox