On 2 November 2011 06:52, Michael Haubenwallner wrote: > > On 10/31/11 19:20, Jonathan Wakely wrote: >> On 31 October 2011 17:38, Rainer Orth wrote: >>> Dennis Clarke <dcla...@blastwave.org> writes: >>> >>>>>> I'm uncertain if Solaris 8/x86 still supports bare i386 machines, so it >>>>>> might be better to keep the default of pentiumpro instead. >>>>> >>>>> Solaris 8 won't run on anything less than pentium, I recently >>>>> convinced someone else to stop building GCC for i386 on Solaris: >>>>> >>>>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2011-10/msg00005.html >> >> Quite. In fact there are *very* good reasons not to configure for >> 80386: libstdc++'s configure uses the default arch being configured >> for, and disables a number of features on i386 because it doesn't >> support the required atomic ops. >> >> So by configuring for i386 you will distribute a GCC package that is >> missing useful features, but supports an ancient architecture that >> Solaris doesn't even run on. >> >> You should configure for pentium-pc-solaris2.8 or use --with-arch-32=pentium > > When not configuring with '--host=i386-pc-solaris2.8', it is config.guess > that detects 'i386-pc-solaris2.8', just tried here with most recent > config.guess on i86pc Solaris2.10, result is 'i386-pc-solaris2.10'. > > Actually, it is uname showing the 'i386' on Solaris: > $ uname -p # Prints the current host's ISA or processor type. > i386 > $ uname -i # Prints the name of the platform. > i86pc > > So I'd wonder if '--host=i386-pc-solaris2.8' actually does make any > difference here.
It's redundant if you *want* to build for that host, but the whole point is that building for i386 is usually a very bad idea, so --host=i586-pc-solaris2.8 would be better.
