>    Imagine the consequences of:
>    ./configure --build=i386-suse-linux-gnu --host=i386-redhat-linux-gnu

It doesn't scare me :-)
You get what you are asking for.

> I think those configuration triplets are wrong.  I think they should
> be something like `i386-pc-linuxsuse7.0-gnu' or
> `i386-pc-linux-gnususe7.0'.

It it not better. "linux" should have the kernel version at the end, as
this is much more relevant. Maybe "gnu" should be GLibc version:


We need to choose whether VENDOR is software vendor or hardware vendor. In
the first case "redhat" and "suse" are absolutely legal. Otherwise it
should be "intel" or "amd". Note that in either case I don't expect from 
config.guess to distinguish between vendors, at least on Linux.

I vote for "hardware vendors". The argument for that is that we should
favor individual developers and users, not companies. SuSE and RedHat have
package managers in their hands, so the can easily deal with the absence
of the "software vendor" field.

Software developers, on another hand, should never target RedHat or
SuSE explicitly, i.e. they should not treat $host_vendor as "software

I don't think that RedHat will be happy if e.g. Lynx developers will
decide that lynx.cfg goes to /etc/ just because gcc is configured by
RedHat. It should be RedHat that decides how to make software fit they
distribution guidelines.

$host_vendor could be of some help for people who cross-compile for
embedded boards. In fact, I would rather have "board name" in that place
as a nice complement to "CPU name", but it's a different story.

Pavel Roskin

Reply via email to