Re: GNU tools netbsd vs netbsdelf
Valery Ushakov <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.os.netbsd.devel.toolchain |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <YMSBZvz8osonw/[email protected]> |
On Sat, Jun 12, 2021 at 08:12:58 +0200, Martin Husemann wrote: > On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 11:01:07PM +0000, David Holland wrote: > > Anyway, a much less theoretical problem is: if you are closely enough > > tied to the GNU triple system that a minor inconsistency like this > > causes trouble, where will you be the next time they decide to change > > it around upstream as a political football? > > I still do not understand the original issue. The failure to build > for > > i686--netbsd > > triggerd this, and while > > i686--netbsdelf > > was accepted by the upstream gcc configure script, it still does not make > much sense, as it should be > > i486--netbsdelf > > instead. There are probably hundreds of targets you could configure that do > not match any real NetBSD supported target, and the list varies over time > (see recentish arm OABI removal). > > So if you have to know what you are doing (or look it up) anyway, why > is any change needed? I have never before seen anyone actually wonder > about the names in this magic tuples, or suggest cosmetic changes. +1 This looks an awful lot like a fools' errand to me. Also, consider that people might have makefiles/scripts written for the current names, so if $tools/shle--netbsdelf-gcc of say netbsd-9 suddenly becomes $tools/shle--netbsd-gcc in netbsd-10 - it just creates random work for random people. Now everyone have to adapt to work with both older and newer versions so that you can make things look a tiny bit nicer. The current scehme works, warts and all, why break it? -uwe