John Ericson <l...@johnericson.me> writes: > I agree the GNU project is not under any such obligation, and that's > why I proposed windows-mingw as a compromise.
Once again, what's wrong with plain mingw? Or winnt? > It is more work for me to go make both GCC and LLVM support, but I > rather do that than be stuck with plain mingw32. Your preferences do not necessarily reflect those of the thousands of Autoconf users, all of whom have lived with the status quo for decades. > There is no existing convention for windows. Really? What's alpha-dec-winnt*, or i586-pc-mingw32? > So far every time a new "brand name" 3rd position component has been > chosen without any sort of pattern. There doesn't have to be a pattern. > Now that I've made (over the past few years) GNU config be more > structured and more easily support longer configs, it is time to > establish a convention. windows-* makes sense Neither make sense. And the overriding objective of all config.* development is to _NEVER_ change the set of canonical values, or even worse, introduce duplicate ones. > and has precedent. >From LLVM? That may be so, but the GNU project elected to use `mingw' and `winnt' decades prior to LLVM's very existence.
