On Mon, Sep 09, 2002 at 04:08:48PM -0400, Nathan Hawkins wrote: > > > Joel Baker wrote: > >On Sat, Sep 07, 2002 at 05:42:09PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > > >>On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 08:29:18PM -0600, Joel Baker wrote: > >> > >>The only packages where this caused any great trouble were gcc and > >>binutils, and that was fairly easily rectified. > > > > > >Hmmm. GCC seems to be content as long as the triple output by > >dpkg-architecture agrees with what config.guess is producing (because > >things get put into a directory named by config.guess output, which is then > >read by dpkg-architecture output rather than config.guess, which may well > >be a bug). > > Probably. I wish people would quit using dpkg --print-architecture in > place of dpkg-architecture.
In this case, neither is appropriate. It needs to be config.guess because that's what decides the directory - and at least in some cases, if you have updated the kernel and are building a new compiler, config.guess will report the new value, while anything from dpkg will print its old value. Lesson: Do not confuse dpkg with GNU canonical tools, especially when you're trying to get GNU canonical values. It's just as trivial to read in the output of config.guess, in this case, and more appropriate. In any case, the changes to autotools-dev (making it non-versioned in favor of a -debian part) work around the bug. > >What other issues are there, and are they about to bite me in the ass? > > There are a handful of packages that will need patching for your new > config triple. (Beyond patching config.guess/.sub) Python and tcl will > need it, IIRC. But these aren't really hard, just nuisense. libtool is the big one. I think I already have patches for that from the first pass. And of course binutils and gdb. Just wondering if it was anything more complex than making sure they recognize the new triple value if they do special things based on the triple. -- *************************************************************************** Joel Baker System Administrator - lightbearer.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://users.lightbearer.com/lucifer/
