Sorry for the late. On 10/31/07, David Howells <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > But is there any utility that depends on that uname says mn10300? > > autoconf:-)
I forgot again the one as an host environment. :-) AFAIK, mn10300 series are for embedded systems and I've never heard as development hosts. I had noticed the new machine name needs to be added / changed, though. > Can you guarantee there won't be any non-AM33 variants of mn10300 that need > supporting? An AM34, perhaps? I think `am33' is a reasonable name if it is the first variant of mn10300 series that is supported by Linux, like `am33' is for glibc and `i386' is (was) for Linux and others. People don't misunderstand that an AM30, AM31 or AM32 is supported by Linux. AM3n seems to be upper compatible with AM3(n-1), so far. MEI (and only they) know if AM34, and any newer core in that series are compatible with AM33. > The discrepancy has been around for years, and I suspect it's not going to > change now. If MEI ask, I will change it. I see. I know there is no technical problem if the arch name continues to be mn10300. It is an issue of some branding strategy, or a designing policy. I understand you (RH) are not in a position to decide to change, nor to refuse to change. I just noticed and became worried about the mismatch. If MEI ask you to change the toolchain name from am33 to mn10300, I have no objection to that. I'd be glad to hear any comments from MEI. -- Suzuki Takashi Japan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
