[x265] [PATCH] Fix CMake to be able to detect powerpc64 / powerpc64le

[Fangrui Song]

On Sat, Sep 16, 2023 at 11:33 AM Brad Smith <brad at comstyle.com> wrote:
>
> ping ping.
>
> On 2023-08-05 8:28 p.m., Brad Smith wrote:
> > ping.
> >
> > On 2023-05-20 7:18 p.m., Brad Smith wrote:
> >> Fix CMake to be able to detect powerpc64 / powerpc64le.
> >>
> >>
> >> diff --git a/source/CMakeLists.txt b/source/CMakeLists.txt
> >> index 882ea0697..5120708cb 100755
> >> --- a/source/CMakeLists.txt
> >> +++ b/source/CMakeLists.txt
> >> @@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ set(ARM64_ALIASES arm64 arm64e aarch64)
> >>   list(FIND X86_ALIASES "${SYSPROC}" X86MATCH)
> >>   list(FIND ARM_ALIASES "${SYSPROC}" ARMMATCH)
> >>   list(FIND ARM64_ALIASES "${SYSPROC}" ARM64MATCH)
> >> -set(POWER_ALIASES ppc64 ppc64le)
> >> +set(POWER_ALIASES powerpc64 powerpc64le ppc64 ppc64le)
> >>   list(FIND POWER_ALIASES "${SYSPROC}" POWERMATCH)
> >>   if(X86MATCH GREATER "-1")
> >>       set(X86 1)
> _______________________________________________
> x265-devel mailing list
> x265-devel at videolan.org
> https://mailman.videolan.org/listinfo/x265-devel

This makes sense.
https://cmake.org/cmake/help/latest/variable/CMAKE_HOST_SYSTEM_PROCESSOR.html
comes from the `uname -m` value.
It seems that some *BSD prefer `uname -m` to be powerpc64{,le}.
(Perhaps Linux systems are the weird ones here as the canonical target
triples are powerpc64{,le}-* while `uname -m` values are often ppc64
or ppc64le.


-- 
宋方睿