Peter Lemenkov wrote:

Hello All!

I plan to add arm-toolchain into Fedora and encountered a difficulty - how to properly name the package? From what I found in the Internets, the cross-toolchains *often* named with the following prefix:

<arch>-<vendor>-<operating system>-<libc>-

For example:

i686-pc-linux-gnu- powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu- x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu-

http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/base/embedded/handbook/?part=1&chap=3

However sometimes they named differently (arm-none-eabi-, arm-uclinuxeabi-, etc). Some cross-compilers already included into Fedora, and their packages naming schemes are also different - some examples of prefixes are arm-gp2x-linux-, avr-, msp430-, spu- (mingw32 differs from others because it, at least, implies target OS and libc).

I'm sure, it's time to create unified rules for packaging of cross-toolchains, but right now I'm asking you for help in proper naming of it. Should we name it as <arch>-<vendor>-<operating system>-<libc>-gcc

IM(NS)HO: basically yes.

It's the clearest and least confusing from.

or should we use some other naming schemes? What values should be used for <vendor> - "fedora" maybe?

No.

O should we simply drop this field ("unknown")?

No.

GCC's canonicalization triples (the triples passed as --target=<..> when configuring a cross-toolchain) are standardized and can not be chosen at random.

What occasionally confuses people is the fact that for some targets abbreviations exist rsp. and that theses triples exit in an "external" (often abbreviated) and "internal" (fully expanded) form.

Ralf