From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23211 invoked by alias); 21 Nov 2003 00:44:03 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 23193 invoked from network); 21 Nov 2003 00:44:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailout.TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE) (129.70.136.245) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 21 Nov 2003 00:44:03 -0000 Received: from xayide.TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE.TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (xayide.TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE [129.70.137.35]) by momotombo.TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (8.11.7p1+Sun/8.11.6/TechFak/2003/04/16/pk) with ESMTP id hAL0i0113204; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 01:44:00 +0100 (MET) From: Rainer Orth Message-ID: <16317.24525.761478.237535@xayide.TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE> Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 01:15:00 -0000 To: Paul Eggert Cc: Ben Elliston , gcc@gcc.gnu.org, binutils@sources.redhat.com, gdb@sources.redhat.com, rms@gnu.org Subject: Re: flag day for Solaris portions of config.{guess,sub} In-Reply-To: <87ptfm7e7k.fsf@penguin.cs.ucla.edu> References: <8765hf4c8z.fsf@wasabisystems.com> <87k75u98bu.fsf@penguin.cs.ucla.edu> <16317.4758.255402.870324@xayide.TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE> <87y8ua7nyl.fsf@penguin.cs.ucla.edu> <16317.12264.979185.14456@xayide.TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE> <87ptfm7e7k.fsf@penguin.cs.ucla.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.106) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2003-11/txt/msg01150.txt.bz2 Paul Eggert writes: > Rainer Orth writes: > > > A continued burden which removes clarity from those scripts, > > Using -sunos5* would not remove clarity from scripts, as it's just as > clear as -solaris2*. And it would not be a continued burden, as it's My comment was referring to the -solaris2.x/-solaris[789]/-solaris variant, where we are left without a catch-all pattern for Solaris 2. -sunos5* is certainly ok in this respect, but also a massive change over dozens or hundreds of packages for no real gain. > It is a tradeoff between maintainer convenience and newbie convenience. > The easiest thing for maintainers is to do nothing, and continue to > confuse novices in this minor way. (After all, we've invented our own > nonstandard jargon that works for us, and if it confuses novices then > that's their problem. :-) Exactly: apart from the minor confusion (which is already there by the SunOS 5 vs. Solaris 2 vs. Solaris 7/8/9/10 mess), no harm is done by sticking to the established convention of using solaris2* instead of sunos5*. The bad choice to use solaris2* instead of sunos5* (where Sun had already created lots of confusion by re-branding SunOS 4.1.1B to Solaris 1.0) as config.guess output had been made early in the history of Solaris 2, and this whole discussion clearly suggest that we stick with that (admittedly bad) choice since compatibility is considerably more important than following marketing inventions. Rainer