Jacob Bachmeyer <jcb62...@gmail.com> writes: > Then its present use is *wrong* and a bug that should be fixed.
The subject of this thread, indeed. > It is a little more complex than that: the GNU system theoretically > can run on any of multiple kernels. While Linux is most commonly > used, GNU HURD is still in development and I understand that there is > a Debian variant using the GNU utilities on a FreeBSD kernel. They're *-*-kfreebsd-gnu and *-*-gnu. >>> but several existing tuples use a libc or ABI name in place of a >>> kernel and/or operating system. >>> >> >> In each of those cases, the ABI name _can_ be construed as a kernel >> (since there is no kernel at all), or the libc name refers to a general >> category of OS. Neither of these situations are applicable to MinGW or >> MSVC. >> > > Arguably, MinGW *is* an ABI name. Either way, that ship has already sailed. So we're stuck with dubbing MinGW an operating system. > Think about why the GNU project pushes to call the common system > "GNU/Linux" and you should see the reason for using > `*-*-linux-gnu-musl' to express a GNU/Linux system using musl libc. If the GNU libc isn't being used, it's not a complete GNU system. We should defer establishing suitable configuration names for Frankenstein systems until the moment they come into existence.
