bug#342: [Lnx-bbc-devel] Re: bug#342: we need to make glibc's autoconf believe that it should cross-compile

Nick Moffitt writes:

> We've been using "i386-linux" and "i386-pc-linux-gnu" as strings.  As
> Daniel clued me into:
> 
> [nick@gargoyle(~/gar/devel/glibc/work/main.d/glibc-2.2.5/scripts)] ./config.sub i386-linux
> i386-pc-linux-gnu
> 
> The one gets expanded to the other!  
> 
> Inkblot suggests i386-lnxbbc-linux:
> 
> [inkblot@gargoyle:~/var/src/gar/devel/glibc/work/singularity.d/glibc-2.3.1]$ ./scripts/config.sub i386-lnxbbc-linux
> i386-lnxbbc-linux-gnu
> 
> I would tend to concur.

If we do this, is there any problem in using (a) our gcc, (b) our
binutils, or (c) our glibc to build things (1) in our gar tree to run
on the BBC, (2) on the BBC to run on the BBC, (3) on the BBC to run on
another host system?

I would not be offended if the answer to some of those were "mu".

I'm assuming that this arch string does not affect the actual binary
format of anything, but I wonder if it can confuse configure scripts
or tools run from configure scripts.  If only I were able to take
Nick's tutorial, I'm sure my confusion about these effects would be
cleared up quickly.

-- 
Seth David Schoen <[email protected]> | Very frankly, I am opposed to people
     http://www.loyalty.org/~schoen/   | being programmed by others.
     http://vitanuova.loyalty.org/     |     -- Fred Rogers (1928-2003),
                                       |        464 U.S. 417, 445 (1984)