Add support for PowerPC (macOS, OpenBSD)

[barracuda156]

@rpav @fitzsim Could we add the support for powerpc-apple-darwin, powerpc64-apple-darwin and possibly OpenBSD targets?

(The current SBCL now works on macOS PowerPC, so this makes sense to support.)

[fitzsim]

Yes, but people with those systems have to test the added support and send pull requests. As long as their presence does not break other targets I see no reason not to include the necessary files for the targets you propose.

[barracuda156]

@fitzsim I can certainly test it, but it is not clear how to write the implementation.

[fitzsim]

Oh, I forgot that cl-autowrap is not under lispgames. I cannot speak for rpav whether they will actually merge anything; I am not a maintainer of cl-autowrap.

[barracuda156]

@fitzsim Yeah, that’s fine. We do not need any guarantees when nothing is done at the moment.

Could you say how did you derive what was needed for ppc64 for Linux here?

[fitzsim]

As I remember, I copy-n-renamed all x86-64 files and conditional code fragments, then tested everything to see if I had missed anything.

[rpav]

If someone who has tested the arch strings etc posts a PR I should be able to get it merged quickly. I don't have an easy way to test these myself.

[barracuda156]

@rpav I could try if I can get it to work once I am back to my PowerMacs.

On a side note, is support for aarch64 planned?

[barracuda156]

@rpav I could try if I can get it to work once I am back to my PowerMacs.

On a side note, is support for aarch64 planned?

[rpav]

(I don't know which aarch64 support you mean but I'm happy to add whatever anyone confirms to autowrap.)

[barracuda156]

(I don't know which aarch64 support you mean but I'm happy to add whatever anyone confirms to autowrap.)

I meant macOS: #113

P. S. Perhaps darwin9 is an atavism? I totally welcome support for 10.5, but it probably does not have to be in the target name.