<p dir="ltr">Any chances for a dedicated SIG?</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">08.06.2015 16:59 пользователь "Jim Perrin" <<a href="mailto:jperrin@centos.org">jperrin@centos.org</a>> написал:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
<br>
On 06/05/2015 05:46 AM, Vladimir Stackov wrote:<br>
> Greetings,<br>
><br>
> currently we are maintaining own CentOS 7 i686 rebuild and I would like to<br>
> kindly ask you to replace following macros from gcc.spec:<br>
><br>
> %if 0%{?rhel} >= 7<br>
> %ifarch %{ix86}<br>
> --with-arch=x86-64 \<br>
> %endif<br>
> %ifarch x86_64<br>
> --with-arch_32=x86-64 \<br>
> %endif<br>
><br>
> with that:<br>
><br>
> %if 0%{?rhel} >= 7<br>
> %ifarch %{ix86}<br>
> --with-arch=i686 \<br>
> %endif<br>
> %ifarch x86_64<br>
> --with-arch_32=i686 \<br>
> %endif<br>
><br>
> x86-64 causes gcc to use extended instruction set for produced code and<br>
> it's impossible to run CentOS 7 i686 on older systems without SSE2<br>
> instruction because of SIGILL.<br>
> This affects Pentium 3, old VIA CPUs, old Xeons and some others.<br>
><br>
> Is that possible?<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Overall, I'm hesitant here as folks (some of the epel devs as well as<br>
others) are looking at this as a way to supplement the 32bit environment<br>
for the base distro for building things like wine. I don't want to mix<br>
gcc build options for things that may live in both places.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
--<br>
Jim Perrin<br>
The CentOS Project | <a href="http://www.centos.org" target="_blank">http://www.centos.org</a><br>
twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
CentOS-devel mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:CentOS-devel@centos.org">CentOS-devel@centos.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel" target="_blank">http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel</a><br>
</blockquote></div>