On 2017-10-19 16:00, cyg Simple wrote: > On 10/19/2017 4:35 PM, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote: >> 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. > > You keep saying my assumption is incorrect but that isn't the case. My > assumption is based on data supplied by the configure process.
Your assumption is that the default and chosen triplets must be one and the same. They are not, they need not be, and we are far from being alone in this regard. Once you accept *that*, then the rest of this will make sense. Several of us with years of experience in these matters have tried to help explain this to you. Repeatedly pointing to the same piece of "evidence" as supposed proof for your "case", as if it were up for debate, isn't helping you to understand how things actually work. This discussion would be better served by being specific about the package you are trying to build, how you are trying to build it, and the exact error message you are seeing. -- Yaakov
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
