Re: MANUFACTURER in canonicalization triple
On Thu, 27 Apr 2000, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> What is the MANUFACTURER aka VENDOR field in a canonicalization triple
> meant to contain?
AFAIC, it has always been pretty useless, especially since the
config.guess maintainers don't seem to be very sure about it themselves
and change it back and forth. For example, the "vendor" of a i386-*-qnx*
machine has changed from "pc" to "qnx" back to "pc". Also there seem to be
*-unknown-linux* and *-pc-linux* machines out there.
I wonder what it really might be useful for. If it's the processor vendor,
the encode that in the cpu name. (Why would you care?) If it's the os
vendor, then encode that in the os name. (What OS has two different
vendors?) That leaves packagers, but if you depend on that information
without testing for features, you're really pushing your luck.
IMO, config.{guess|sub} are sometimes a painful hogwash of overly specific
and overly general, so using the output for anything but naming your
cross-toolchain isn't going to work very well in general.
--
Peter Eisentraut Sernanders väg 10:115
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 75262 Uppsala
http://yi.org/peter-e/Sweden
Re: MANUFACTURER in canonicalization triple
On Thu, 27 Apr 2000, Pavel Roskin wrote: > > > 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: > > i386-pc-linux2.3.99_pre5-gnu2.1.3_pre3 You guys are plumb crazy. Maybe we don't really need Autoconf anymore since we can just encode everything we need in the output of config.guess. Everyone is moving to Linux, after all, so there is really no need to know anything more than the kernel version, the name of the distribution, the processor family, and the C library version. Once we eliminate all those annoying feature tests, then 'configure' will run a whole lot faster. Bob == Bob Friesenhahn [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen
Re: MANUFACTURER in canonicalization triple
Hello! >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: i386-pc-linux2.3.99_pre5-gnu2.1.3_pre3 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 vendor" 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. Regards, Pavel Roskin
Re: MANUFACTURER in canonicalization triple
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 13:52:53 +0200 From: Ralf Corsepius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> What is the MANUFACTURER aka VENDOR field in a canonicalization triple meant to contain? It normally contains the manufacturer or vendor of the hardware. I am asking, because i386-pc-linux distributors have started to set this field to their name for the gnu-toolchains distributed with their distributions (IMHO, an uncredible decision ;). However, a PC still remains a PC and is not a SuSE, RH, Debian or whatsoever machine. Imagine the consequences of: ./configure --build=i386-suse-linux-gnu --host=i386-redhat-linux-gnu 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'. Ian
MANUFACTURER in canonicalization triple
Hi, What is the MANUFACTURER aka VENDOR field in a canonicalization triple meant to contain? My understanding is that it shall describe the vendor/manufacturer of a board or better the board family, being used to guess/preset settings for a specific setups, primarily in near-hardware packages (e.g. binutils). I know the VENDOR field is rarely used at all, therefore the value won't matter in most cases, but as we're at clarifying canonicalization, this could become an issue. I am asking, because i386-pc-linux distributors have started to set this field to their name for the gnu-toolchains distributed with their distributions (IMHO, an uncredible decision ;). However, a PC still remains a PC and is not a SuSE, RH, Debian or whatsoever machine. Imagine the consequences of: ./configure --build=i386-suse-linux-gnu --host=i386-redhat-linux-gnu Ralf. -- Ralf Corsepius Forschungsinstitut fuer Anwendungsorientierte Wissensverarbeitung (FAW) Helmholtzstr. 16, 89081 Ulm, Germany Tel: +49/731/501-8690 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] FAX: +49/731/501-999 http://www.faw.uni-ulm.de
