[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: config.guess comments from our sysadmins

From: Bob Proulx
Subject: Re: config.guess comments from our sysadmins
Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2006 13:04:13 -0600
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.9i

Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> It may be considered a good thing to some, but it is not necessarily a 
> good thing.  Consider that the rest of the build package (e.g. 
> libtool) is expecting particular host identifications and that 
> sometimes the behavior of these scripts change.

Only very rarely will a particular platform change names.

> Also, consider that the versions available for a given platform may
> actually be older than the ones that come in the package.

Yes.  But working on that particular system so it won't matter.  New
config.guess scripts are almost always required on new platforms.  As
new platforms are supported the script is updated.  But on any given
system once working it probably never needs to change again for that
system.  Within reasonable limits of script improvements of course.

> You are breaking a matched/tested set of tools.

Almost always when porting applications to hppa, ia64, amd64, etc. as
at the time that I wanted to compile on those platforms they were new
and I almost always needed to update the config.guess to support those
platforms.  New platforms are almost always that way.  Mature
platforms with better support just work out of the box with any
version.  So it does not matter in those cases.

I think someone reading your response will then be scared to update
the config.guess because you say it breaks a matched set.  But I think
that fear is unwarranted and in most cases the script *must* be
updated in order to work on new platforms.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]