From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 422 invoked by alias); 3 Dec 2003 17:22:18 -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 380 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2003 17:22:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.73.237.138) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 3 Dec 2003 17:22:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 5530 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2003 17:17:01 -0000 Received: from taltos.codesourcery.com (zack@66.92.218.83) by mail.codesourcery.com with DES-CBC3-SHA encrypted SMTP; 3 Dec 2003 17:17:01 -0000 Received: by taltos.codesourcery.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 3 Dec 2003 09:22:05 -0800 From: "Zack Weinberg" To: rms@gnu.org Cc: eggert@CS.UCLA.EDU, bje@wasabisystems.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org, binutils@sources.redhat.com, gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: flag day for Solaris portions of config.{guess,sub} References: <8765hf4c8z.fsf@wasabisystems.com> <87wu9mt79r.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com> <871xrs5b9j.fsf@penguin.cs.ucla.edu> <87znegqb31.fsf@codesourcery.com> <87brqsw9d9.fsf@penguin.cs.ucla.edu> <871xroqlaf.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com> <87n0aaj4cl.fsf@penguin.cs.ucla.edu> <87wu9esxu6.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com> Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 17:22:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Wed, 03 Dec 2003 12:17:01 -0500") Message-ID: <87ad69rf42.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2003-12/txt/msg00046.txt.bz2 Richard Stallman writes: > > This overstates the amount of work that will need to be done, as the > > vast majority of configure scripts will not be affected by this change, > > whereas the switch from Autoconf 2.13 to 2.5x required changes to most > > configure.in files. > > The burden is on you to prove that - in the absence of evidence we > must assume that most or all configure scripts *will* have to be > modified; > > Don't we know that most programs that use Autoconf don't actually look > at the configuration name at all? Paul Eggert already presented evidence that roughly 10% of a sample of configure.in scripts not only look at the configuration name, but match it against patterns containing the string "solaris" or "sunos". To my mind that is enough to rule out the proposed change as too costly. And, for the third time, Autoconf is not the only user of config.guess/config.sub. zw