Re: [rfc] autotools compatibility and Hurd as platform

Subject: Re: [rfc] autotools compatibility and Hurd as platform

Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2012 22:20:39 -0400

To: Justus Winter, notmuch@notmuchmail.org

Cc:

From: David Bremner


On Sat,  3 Mar 2012 17:40:21 +0100, Justus Winter <4winter@informatik.uni-hamburg.de> wrote:

> The patch reuses config.sub to canonicalize the arguments, but this
> introduces a build dependency on autotools and probably worse, it uses
> autotools internals and the path to config.sub has to be hardcoded.
> 
> Since this might be not desirable we might also just drop the code
> that parses the --host and --build options since we're not using them
> anyway.

The second solution sounds better to me. The only issue we might
encounter is dealing with multi-arch installation properly. But I guess
we don't do that now anyway, so no real loss.

d



Thread: