From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25706 invoked by alias); 4 Dec 2003 23:00:25 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 25619 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2003 23:00:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dublin.act-europe.fr) (212.157.227.154) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 4 Dec 2003 23:00:23 -0000 Received: by dublin.act-europe.fr (Postfix, from userid 525) id 7F68722A138; Fri, 5 Dec 2003 00:00:21 +0100 (MET) Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 23:00:00 -0000 From: Arnaud Charlet To: Paul Eggert Cc: Ben Elliston , Zack Weinberg , 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} Message-ID: <20031205000019.A18464@dublin.act-europe.fr> References: <87brqsw9d9.fsf@penguin.cs.ucla.edu> <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> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <87r7zkb6xm.fsf@penguin.cs.ucla.edu>; from eggert@CS.UCLA.EDU on Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 01:37:41PM -0800 X-SW-Source: 2003-12/txt/msg00093.txt.bz2 > OK, how about the following more-conservative change instead? This Please don't, that'd be worse. SunOS no longer means anything, so this should really be solaris7, solaris8, solaris9, etc... And solaris10 if this is how the next version of Solaris will be called. While I agree that this issue has already been discussed too much, I also strongly disagree about the apparent conclusion: nobody has provided any real figure about the impact of this change, only assumptions and personal feelings. Also, changing new config.guess won't break existing packages, so we're talking about new packages using new version of config.guess, and a very low amount of packages that will need to be changed. The amount of changes will be lower than the amount of changes required to switch from one version of autoconf to another, and lower or equal to the amount of work required to support a new version of Solaris, so I really don't see any convincing argument for using the wrong names. The official names for Solaris are clear, and I don't see any reason to use non existing versions, leading to clearly incorrect names. Arno