Any chances for a dedicated SIG? 08.06.2015 16:59 пользователь "Jim Perrin" <jperrin at centos.org> написал: > > > On 06/05/2015 05:46 AM, Vladimir Stackov wrote: > > Greetings, > > > > currently we are maintaining own CentOS 7 i686 rebuild and I would like > to > > kindly ask you to replace following macros from gcc.spec: > > > > %if 0%{?rhel} >= 7 > > %ifarch %{ix86} > > --with-arch=x86-64 \ > > %endif > > %ifarch x86_64 > > --with-arch_32=x86-64 \ > > %endif > > > > with that: > > > > %if 0%{?rhel} >= 7 > > %ifarch %{ix86} > > --with-arch=i686 \ > > %endif > > %ifarch x86_64 > > --with-arch_32=i686 \ > > %endif > > > > x86-64 causes gcc to use extended instruction set for produced code and > > it's impossible to run CentOS 7 i686 on older systems without SSE2 > > instruction because of SIGILL. > > This affects Pentium 3, old VIA CPUs, old Xeons and some others. > > > > Is that possible? > > > > Overall, I'm hesitant here as folks (some of the epel devs as well as > others) are looking at this as a way to supplement the 32bit environment > for the base distro for building things like wine. I don't want to mix > gcc build options for things that may live in both places. > > > > -- > Jim Perrin > The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org > twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77 > _______________________________________________ > CentOS-devel mailing list > CentOS-devel at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20150608/6c48d164/attachment-0008.html>