Currently, dmd simply looks for libphobos.a

I suggest changing it to:

    lib32/libphobos.a    for -m32
    lib64/libphobos.a    for -m64

On Monday 03 January 2011 14:48:38 Walter Bright wrote:
> Currently, dmd simply looks for libphobos.a
> 
> I suggest changing it to:
> 
>     lib32/libphobos.a    for -m32
>     lib64/libphobos.a    for -m64

I assume that that's within the file hierarchy in the zip file? The correct directories for those varies from distribution to distribution if you're talking about /lib, /usr/lib, or /usr/local/lib. Some distros have lib for 32-bit and 64-bit. Others do lib for 64-bit and lib32 for 32-bit. However, any that have both lib32 and lib64 are going to have lib as well with either lib being a symlink to one of the other two or one of the other two being a symlink to lib.

- Jonathan M Davis

How will this interact with the config files?

I do think we should ship with both.  Even if it's only useful for us developers, I want it to be easier to use both side by side.

On Jan 3, 2011, at 2:48 PM, Walter Bright <walter at digitalmars.com> wrote:

> Currently, dmd simply looks for libphobos.a
>
> I suggest changing it to:
>
>   lib32/libphobos.a    for -m32
>   lib64/libphobos.a    for -m64
> _______________________________________________
> phobos mailing list
> phobos at puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos

Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> On Monday 03 January 2011 14:48:38 Walter Bright wrote:
> 
>> Currently, dmd simply looks for libphobos.a
>>
>> I suggest changing it to:
>>
>>     lib32/libphobos.a    for -m32
>>     lib64/libphobos.a    for -m64
>> 
>
> I assume that that's within the file hierarchy in the zip file? The correct directories for those varies from distribution to distribution if you're talking about /lib, /usr/lib, or /usr/local/lib. Some distros have lib for 32-bit and 64-bit. Others do lib for 64-bit and lib32 for 32-bit. However, any that have both lib32 and lib64 are going to have lib as well with either lib being a symlink to one of the other two or one of the other two being a symlink to lib.
>
> 

I figure the lib32 and lib64 directories being subdirectories of the directory they are installed in - i.e. dmd will search for lib32/libphobos.a or lib64/libphobos.a

Brad Roberts wrote:
> How will this interact with the config files?

The config files should point at a directory. lib32 and lib64 should be subdirectories of that.

>
> I do think we should ship with both.  Even if it's only useful for us developers, I want it to be easier to use both side by side.

Yes.

>
>
> On Jan 3, 2011, at 2:48 PM, Walter Bright <walter at digitalmars.com> wrote:
>
>> Currently, dmd simply looks for libphobos.a
>>
>> I suggest changing it to:
>>
>>   lib32/libphobos.a    for -m32
>>   lib64/libphobos.a    for -m64
>> _______________________________________________
>> phobos mailing list
>> phobos at puremagic.com
>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
> _______________________________________________
> phobos mailing list
> phobos at puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
>
>

Le 2011-01-03 ? 18:00, Jonathan M Davis a ?crit :

> On Monday 03 January 2011 14:48:38 Walter Bright wrote:
>> Currently, dmd simply looks for libphobos.a
>> 
>> I suggest changing it to:
>> 
>>    lib32/libphobos.a    for -m32
>>    lib64/libphobos.a    for -m64
> 
> I assume that that's within the file hierarchy in the zip file? The correct directories for those varies from distribution to distribution if you're talking about /lib, /usr/lib, or /usr/local/lib. Some distros have lib for 32-bit and 64-bit. Others do lib for 64-bit and lib32 for 32-bit. However, any that have both lib32 and lib64 are going to have lib as well with either lib being a symlink to one of the other two or one of the other two being a symlink to lib.

And on OS X, multiple architectures are generally merged in the same library/executable file as a "fat" or "universal" binary. Use the command "lipo" to create one.

A naming change like this would break D for Xcode. So I'll have to release a new version and to keep it backward compatible for those who stick with older versions of DMD I'd have some detection job to do. On the other hand, creating a fat library using "lipo" wouldn't cause any disruption...

-- 
Michel Fortin
michel.fortin at michelf.com
http://michelf.com/

Michel Fortin wrote:
> Le 2011-01-03 ? 18:00, Jonathan M Davis a ?crit :
>
> 
>> On Monday 03 January 2011 14:48:38 Walter Bright wrote:
>> 
>>> Currently, dmd simply looks for libphobos.a
>>>
>>> I suggest changing it to:
>>>
>>>    lib32/libphobos.a    for -m32
>>>    lib64/libphobos.a    for -m64
>>> 
>> I assume that that's within the file hierarchy in the zip file? The correct
>> directories for those varies from distribution to distribution if you're talking
>> about /lib, /usr/lib, or /usr/local/lib. Some distros have lib for 32-bit and
>> 64-bit. Others do lib for 64-bit and lib32 for 32-bit. However, any that have
>> both lib32 and lib64 are going to have lib as well with either lib being a
>> symlink to one of the other two or one of the other two being a symlink to lib.
>> 
>
> And on OS X, multiple architectures are generally merged in the same library/executable file as a "fat" or "universal" binary. Use the command "lipo" to create one.
>
> A naming change like this would break D for Xcode. So I'll have to release a new version and to keep it backward compatible for those who stick with older versions of DMD I'd have some detection job to do. On the other hand, creating a fat library using "lipo" wouldn't cause any disruption...
>
> 

Doing 64 bit OSX is a bit down the road. I don't think Linux supports such fat libraries.

On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 3:19 PM, Walter Bright <walter at digitalmars.com> wrote:
>
>
> Brad Roberts wrote:
>>
>> How will this interact with the config files?
>
> The config files should point at a directory. lib32 and lib64 should be subdirectories of that.

Why don't we have something similar to GCC. -lphobos

Ignoring /usr/lib32/libphobos.a: wrong architecture.

I don't know exactly where all this information is, but I believe it is something like this:

* provide paths to where libraries are
* convert -lphobos to libphobos.a and libphobos.so
* search for those files in the library paths (recursive I believe)
* ignore libraries meant for a different architecture

The second step isn't needed since libphobos.a is always what is looked for. I think the linker already ignores libraries of the wrong architecture.

Le 2011-01-03 ? 18:49, Walter Bright a ?crit :

> Michel Fortin wrote:
>> And on OS X, multiple architectures are generally merged in the same library/executable file as a "fat" or "universal" binary. Use the command "lipo" to create one.
>> 
>> A naming change like this would break D for Xcode. So I'll have to release a new version and to keep it backward compatible for those who stick with older versions of DMD I'd have some detection job to do. On the other hand, creating a fat library using "lipo" wouldn't cause any disruption...
> 
> Doing 64 bit OSX is a bit down the road. I don't think Linux supports such fat libraries.

Right. But what I should have said is that changing the path for the 32 bit version can easily disrupt existing toolchains. For instance, someone who wants to link both C, C++ and D code together is likely not using DMD as the driver for the linker, which implies the use of a hard-coded path to phobos; in this case changing the library's path will break things.

An option would be to keep the 32-bit version as is, and put the 64-bit version in lib64. Or you could add a symlink lib/libphobos.a pointing to lib32/libpobos.a which would keep things working as before.

Or, on the other hand, people like me can also update the toolchain (in my case that'd be when the Mac OS X version is ready).

-- 
Michel Fortin
michel.fortin at michelf.com
http://michelf.com/

Jesse Phillips wrote:
>
> I think the linker already ignores libraries of the wrong architecture.
>
> 

No, it barfs on it.