Date: Thu, 7 May 2026 10:57:55 -0500
From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Jakob Egger <jakob@eggerapps.at>,
	pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>,
	John Naylor <johncnaylorls@gmail.com>,
	Tobias Bussmann <t.bussmann@gmx.net>
Subject: Re: Broken build on macOS (Universal / Intel): cpuid instruction not
 available
Message-ID: <afy2g9v19epGW8R_@nathan>
References: <223EA201-A0E8-4A13-B220-EB903E8DF817@eggerapps.at>
 <871806.1778168884@sss.pgh.pa.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <871806.1778168884@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/afy2g9v19epGW8R_%40nathan>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, May 07, 2026 at 11:48:04AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> To make this actually work well, we'd have to do two sets of configure
> probes, one for each arch, and somehow apply the correct set of
> #defines depending on arch.  That's a lot of work that I personally
> have no interest in doing, seeing that the handwriting is on the wall
> for Apple's support of x86.
> 
> I wonder whether we shouldn't just disclaim support for multi-arch
> builds.  If it's easy to un-break, then sure we might as well restore
> the status quo ante, but I don't think it's worth putting a ton of
> work into.

+1.  I'm not mortally opposed to the idea if someone wants to do the work,
but at the moment I can't get excited about it.  Perhaps multi-arch builds
will become more common down the road, though.

-- 
nathan