Hi Earnie,
[Guys, can you *pretty please* leave me on the Cc: for your replies?
I'm asking this for the third time now to no avail. I'm not subscribed
to config-patches and it's extremely tedious having a discussion when
you see some of the answers only by coincidence. Thanks.]
> On 12/20/2018 4:46 PM, Rainer Orth wrote:
>> Hi Apostolos,
>>
>> [Please leave config-patches on the Cc: Thanks.]
>>
>>> Yes but I want this script to correctlydetect wheather I am using a 64 or
>>> 32bit system.Previously, the script "detected" that allSolaris systems are
>>> 32bit systems, somethingcompletely wrong.
>>
>> you seem to ignore or misunderstand what I've written: there's no such
>> thing as a 64-bit *system*.
>
> The result of `uname -m' is what gives the system.
Says who?
>> If you build 64-bit code, you should get
>> the 64-bit configure triplet;
>
> No, if you're on a system identified by `uname -m' as x86_64 or other 64bit
> types then by default you will get a 64bit guessed triplet. If you want
> some other triplet then it is up to the user to give it.
If that were the criterion (which it isn't, more below), Apostolos'
patch were wrong: every Solaris/x86 system returns i86pc for uname -m,
irrespective of 32 or 64-bit kernel. It has been this way since x86
support was introduced in Solaris 2.1 and remains so until the present
day.
>> if you build 32-bit code (even on a system
>> also capable of executing 64-bit code), you get the 32-bit triplet.
>>
>
> No, if your on a system identified by `uname -m' as x86_64 or other 64bit
> types then by default you will get a 64bit guessed triplet. If you want to
> build 32bit code then you need to specify the triplet.
That may be your wish, but the autoconf manual, which defines configure
triplets, says otherwise:
14.1 Specifying target triplets
===============================
Autoconf-generated `configure' scripts can make decisions based on a
canonical name for the system type, or "target triplet", which has the
form: `CPU-VENDOR-OS', where OS can be `SYSTEM' or `KERNEL-SYSTEM'
`configure' can usually guess the canonical name for the type of
system it's running on. To do so it runs a script called
`config.guess', which infers the name using the `uname' command or
symbols predefined by the C preprocessor.
And this is exactly what happens on Solaris/x86: it's a combination of
uname and cpp predefines.
So please check your facts first, else it's pointless to continue this
discussion with you.
>> And you still haven't answered my original question: what problem
>> prompted you to make this config.guess change? Without that
>> information, it's hard to decide what this is all about.
>
> I remember it being discussed but I don't remember the details and won't do
> the research for you. In the end it was decided that using anything other
> than uname -m to determine the system was a no go.
That must have been in an alternative reality: the only config-pathes
post on Apostolos' patch was Karl's submission of the patch. If there
was more, it's not in the archives.
Rainer
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
_______________________________________________
config-patches mailing list
config-patches@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/config-patches
