Dropping 32-bit support (was Branches)

Mike Swingler swingler at apple.com
Tue Feb 21 15:32:36 PST 2012

Would it be feasible to overload ARCH_DATA_MODEL to take a string like "32+64", "32/64", or "Universal" (even though that's an ambiguous misnomer)?

On Feb 21, 2012, at 3:31 PM, Phil Race wrote:

> 'ARCH_DATA_MODEL' has historically been used to select a build as 32 or 64 bit.
> So  'ARCH_DATA_MODEL=32' ought to be able to select a 32 bit only build without
> too many build changes. Making that support 32+64 as well may be appropriate for OS X builds.
> -phil.
> On 2/21/2012 3:19 PM, Mike Swingler wrote:
>> Awesome, thanks much James.
>> Is there a pre-existing flag or naming convention for architecture-related build flags? Obviously we want to align with existing precedent, and get the HotSpot and JDK sides to use the same flag. :-)
>> On Feb 21, 2012, at 2:58 PM, James Melvin wrote:
>>> Yes.  I can file a bug and look into this, Mike.
>>> - Jim
>>> On 2/21/12 5:55 PM, Mike Swingler wrote:
>>>> On Feb 21, 2012, at 2:45 PM, James Melvin wrote:
>>>>> One caveat...
>>>>> For the JVM, we've preserved 32/64-bit universal builds. Currently, the
>>>>> JVM universal build only includes 64-bit support. Additionally including
>>>>> 32-bit requires 3 Makefile uncomments. However, there may likely be
>>>>> additional work on the JDK side to fully support the same.
>>>> That's good to know, but that should really be keyed off of a build flag (which can default to 64-bit only). Should we file a CR through the Oracle bug reporter to get the process started to change this for HotSpot?
>> Is there someone who can help restore the 32/64-bit build-ability for the JDK side, or at least direct us as to where we can start filing a CR?

Mike Swingler
Apple Inc.

More information about the macosx-port-dev mailing list