[llvmlinux] Proposal for new naming convention to targets

Tinti viniciustinti at gmail.com
Wed Jan 15 15:35:46 UTC 2014


On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 1:21 PM, Jan-Simon Möller <
jsmoeller at linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> The naming is kind of similar to how toolchains are named e.g. in ct-ng .
> Well we're not far off-topic anyway regarding toolchaing.


Yes. I do like the toolchain naming (like Linaro does).


> > arm-linux-beaglebone
> > arm-linux-vexpress
> > arm64-linux-vexpress
> > x86-linux-pc
> > x86_64-linux-pc
>
> is fine with me.
>
> > arm-linux-beaglebone
> > armhf-linux-beaglebone
> > arm-linux-rpi
> > armhf-linux-rpi
>
> is a lot more variants - do we want to maintain all ? or just pick a
> default
> (armhf) and allow a switch for softfp "at own risk".
>

We do not need to have all variants. If we or someone are interested in
maintain two variants it must follow this naming convention. For example,
Raspberry Pi or BeagleBone are candidates to this situation.


> The year suffix is something I don't like atm. We should convert the
> snapshots
> to the new paths .
>

Yes. I did not like it that much too but was the best simple and soft
solution that I could mind.


> Best,
> JS
>
>
Regards
Tinti


> --
>
> Sincerely yours,
>
> Jan-Simon Möller
>
> jsmoeller at linuxfoundation.org
> Am Mittwoch, 15. Januar 2014, 13:06:42 schrieb Tinti:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I would like to propose a new naming convention for our targets to
> address
> > some name problems that we may have (soon). Currently, for instance, we
> > just use 'beaglebone' to refer the BeagleBone board. But it does not say
> > some key points:
> >
> > - Which architecture? (arm, arm64, x86. x86_64)
> > - Which target system? (Linux, Android)
> > - How to handle name collision? (Nexus 7 2012, Nexus 7 2013)
> > - Which abi? (armhf, armel)
> > - Which system flavor? (AOSP, Cyanogenmod, Linaro, Yocto)
> >
> > Some of these questions may not be that important but the first three
> are.
> > Thus I would like to propose the following convention:
> >
> > <arch>[<abi>]-<system/flavor>-<name>[_year]
> >
> > For example BeagleBone, vexpress, vexpress64, i586 and x86_64 would
> become:
> >
> > arm-linux-beaglebone
> > arm-linux-vexpress
> > arm64-linux-vexpress
> > x86-linux-pc
> > x86_64-linux-pc
> >
> > For BeagleBone and Raspberry Pi we may need to add the "abi" since they
> can
> > use both:
> >
> > arm-linux-beaglebone
> > armhf-linux-beaglebone
> > arm-linux-rpi
> > armhf-linux-rpi
> >
> > For adding a specific system we could replace the system for the flavor:
> >
> > arm-linux-nexus7
> > arm-cyanogenmod-nexus7
> > arm-yocto-nexus7
> >
> > Changing the name probably will break the "checkpoint" feature. Hence
> what
> > I would suggest it to keep the old name and add the new one with an year
> > suffix.
> >
> > arm-linux-nexus7
> > arm-linux-nexus7_13
> >
> > What do you think? I appreciate any suggestion or better conventions for
> > this. Specially for the ABI point of view.
> >
> > If we could always split by only '-' we could do even some cool
> operations
> > such list all x86 targets, test all arm targets and so forth.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Tinti
>
>


-- 
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/llvmlinux/attachments/20140115/16058ce4/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the LLVMLinux mailing list