Typo in ppc64le architecture build

[othomann]

For the version 1.7, I think there is a typo on the architecture for ppc64le.
The built file name is: jq-linux-ppc64el.
Is this intentional ? Other tools with multiarch builds are all using ppc64le for the architecture instead of ppc64el.

[emanuele6]

I don't think it is a typo; I have found many other multiarch builds that spell it "ppc64el" searching "ppc64el" with the github search bar, but "ppc64le" is 5 times more popular.

Also that is the spelling used by debian for its power pc port: https://wiki.debian.org/ppc64el.
The wikipedia article for ppc64 calls it ppc64le though: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ppc64.

Since debian calls it ppc64el, I think it is probably fine to call it ppc64el.
I am not sure why it is spelled "el" though; I have noticed other architectures officially do that too; e.g. ARMel for little-endian ARM.
Maybe it is that way because it is supposed to represent "le" written in little endian. :)

EDIT: actually, filtering by language:yaml, "ppc64el" only has 4.2k results against 69.9k results for "ppc64le", so, yeah, "ppc64le" is probably way more popular for github multiarch builds.

[nicowilliams]

le == little-endian, right? so it's a typo, even if a common one.

[othomann]

This broke my build where I am using multiple architectures, one of them being "ppc64le". I added a workaround for now.

[emanuele6]

@nicowilliams
But el is not universally a typo e.g. armel, and mipsel are not typos, they are the correct common names as far as I can tell.

Maybe ppc64el is not the official name for ppc64's little endian version, but at the same time it is the name that debian/ubuntu uses.

Anyway, if you want to change ppc64el to ppc64le for the next releases, I don't personally have any problem with that.

[itchyny]

So we rename only ppc64el, but not armel and mipsel? I'm okay with that.

[nicowilliams]

For what it's worth, I don't care about this either way. OP can deal if we don't change it, and changing it won't add much value. And somehow I wasn't getting the joke, that el is le, but, you know, backwards, because little-endian is... backwards. So in the interest of doing the least work possible 😄 I'm for closing this as not-a-bug.

[nicowilliams]

@othomann is the system reporting the architecture as ppc64le?

[othomann]

Hi, for my builds, yes, the architecture is "linux/ppc64le" and I have automation to build the binary file based on the given architecture and in this case, it fails because it doesn't look for the right file name.

[nicowilliams]

@othomann can you fix that automation?

[othomann]

I have a workaround just for jq.