From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22718 invoked by alias); 5 Dec 2003 04:50:04 -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 22654 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2003 04:50:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smtp2.Stanford.EDU) (171.67.16.116) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 5 Dec 2003 04:50:01 -0000 Received: from windlord.stanford.edu (windlord.Stanford.EDU [171.64.19.147]) by smtp2.Stanford.EDU (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id hB54o0FS020102 for ; Thu, 4 Dec 2003 20:50:00 -0800 Received: (qmail 10771 invoked by uid 1000); 5 Dec 2003 04:50:00 -0000 To: rms@gnu.org, gcc@gcc.gnu.org, binutils@sources.redhat.com, gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: flag day for Solaris portions of config.{guess,sub} In-Reply-To: <87y8tstapz.fsf@wasabisystems.com> (Ben Elliston's message of "05 Dec 2003 10:38:32 +1100") References: <871xroqlaf.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com> <87n0aaj4cl.fsf@penguin.cs.ucla.edu> <87wu9esxu6.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com> <87ad69rf42.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com> <87y8tsx58e.fsf@codesourcery.com> <8765gwvowl.fsf@wasabisystems.com> <87r7zkb6xm.fsf@penguin.cs.ucla.edu> <20031204151345.A23762@synopsys.com> <874qwgp3jm.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com> <87y8tstapz.fsf@wasabisystems.com> From: Russ Allbery Organization: The Eyrie Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 05:00:00 -0000 Message-ID: <87ptf3lvgn.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu> User-Agent: Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) XEmacs/21.4 (Common Lisp, linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2003-12/txt/msg00377.txt.bz2 Ben Elliston writes: > Some people care because the output of config.guess does not match the > well-known name by which that operating system and version are known. > This is, admittedly, potentially confusing to newbies who think they are > using a Solaris 7 system and config.guess tells them they are using > Solaris 2.7. I've got to say that this is rather unlikely to confuse anyone who's been administering Solaris for any length of time. Heck, every Solaris admin that I know personally called Solaris 7 Solaris 2.7 instead, and Solaris 2.8 wasn't at all uncommon. It's just the actual Solaris version with "2." prepended. I don't think it's going to confuse anyone too badly, and it's the sort of confusion that's pretty readily remedied. (Oh, and please, don't make any version of Solaris identify itself as "sunos" anything. That would break every Autoconf script I have that cares about Solaris as a platform. -solaris10 wouldn't break nearly as much.) -- Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu)