On 2017-10-19 15:02, cyg Simple wrote: > 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.
Incorrect assumption.
>> 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.
That is not a requirement.
>> 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.
No patch is needed here.
--
Yaakov
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
