On 10/19/2017 3:54 PM, Brian Inglis wrote:
> On 2017-10-19 12:59, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
>> On 2017-10-19 13:40, cyg Simple wrote:
>>> x86_64-pc-cygwin is just not correct regardless of the lack of past issues.
>>
>> As I have said several times, this assertion is incorrect. You need to
>> use the triplet which matches the toolchain with which you are building.
>> For example, Fedora and RHEL all use $arch-redhat-linux as their
>> triplet, and there is nothing wrong with that.
>
> Vendor -unknown- is just a default in various config cases, so specifying -pc-
> for consistency on Cygwin builds is a valid choice by the maintainers.
>
FINE! But config.guess should match the CHOSEN one.
> Perhaps a statement on the cygwin-apps list could clarify what should be done
> by
> maintainers to ensure this override, and maybe retire the use of -unknown- by
> any Cygwin apps in future, with a notice to this (cygwin) list for those who
> choose to build packages from net sources.
>
I don't care which is used as long as config.guess matches what is chosen.
> Perhaps also patches should be submitted to the config and automake
> maintainers
> to ensure that {i*,x86_64}:CYGWIN*:*... always produce vendor -pc-. Not sure
> about vendors for {amd64,powerpcle}:CYGWIN*:*... in config.guess, which are
> currently also set to -unknown-.
>
Exactly what I'm saying. It needs to match what is being distributed
just for consistency and to avoid confusion.
--
cyg Simple
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
