Re: [Boost-users] [Boost.build] Building for ARM64

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] [Boost.build] Building for ARM64
From: Jürgen Hunold (jhunold_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-01-14 10:45:59

Hi mefyl,

Am Dienstag, 13. Januar 2015, 16:16:29 schrieb mefyl:
> On Tuesday 13 January 2015 17:06:55 Vladimir Prus wrote:
> > On 01/13/2015 04:45 PM, mefyl wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 13 January 2015 13:49:29 Akim Demaille wrote:
> > Cool. Could you suggest entire set of -arch options that should be added
> > to
> > clang-darwin.jam?
> 
> Sure, here are the ones I actively use:
> 
> flags clang-darwin OPTIONS <architecture>arm <address-model>32 : -arch armv7
> ; flags clang-darwingOPTIONS <architecture>arm <address-model>64 : -arch
> arm64 ;
> 
> flags clang-darwin OPTIONS <architecture>x86 <address-model>32 : -arch x86 ;
> flags clang-darwin OPTIONS <architecture>x86 <address-model>64 : -arch
> x86_64 ;

Could you please create a Pull Request with those? And check if they can be 
added for both gcc and clang at the end of gcc.jam

> From the clang documentation, I would infer these, altough I can't test
> them:
> 
> flags clang-darwin OPTIONS <architecture>sparc : -arch sparc ; // sparcv9
> also exists
> 
> flags clang-darwin OPTIONS <architecture>power <address-model>32 : -arch ppc
> ; flags clang-darwin OPTIONS <architecture>power <address-model>64 : -arch
> ppc64 ;

Untested is not good :-)

> I'm not really fluent about mips.
> 
> Boost has: "mips1" "mips2" "mips3" "mips4" "mips32" "mips32r2" "mips64"
> clang has:
>  mips,    // MIPS: mips, mipsallegrex
>  mipsel,  // MIPSEL: mipsel, mipsallegrexel
>  mips64,  // MIPS64: mips64
>  mips64el,// MIPS64EL: mips64el
>  msp430,  // MSP430: msp430
> 
> Additionnaly, clang can create Apple fat objects and libraries combining
> several architecture by passing multiple -arch option. By building with
> "-arm x86_64 -arch arm -arch arm64" you get libraries working on 32 or 64
> bits phones as well as the emulator, for instance. However, I suppose it
> wouldn't be practical to do this with boost.build since different set of
> files/option should be picked in the same build? One can build three times
> and merge libraries afterwards anyway.

Yes, single invokation is usually better.

Yours,

Jürgen
-- 
* Dipl.-Math. Jürgen Hunold  ! juergen.hunold_at_[hidden]
* voice: 0049 4257 300       ! Fährstraße 1
* fax  : [phone]       ! 31609 Balge/Sebbenhausen
* mobil: 0049 178 186 1566   ! Germany