flag day for Solaris portions of config.{guess,sub}
Alexandre Oliva
aoliva@redhat.com
Fri Dec 12 05:24:00 GMT 2003
On Dec 8, 2003, Rainer Orth <ro@TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE> wrote:
> (c) is clearly the only option, especially since the only gain of change is
> consistence with (inherently inconsistent and changing) vendor marketing
> whims. You could have made this change in the Solaris 2.0 days, but not
> after the current scheme has been in use for 10 years.
There's another reason to change from solaris2.10 to something else:
to avoid matches on say solaris2.[0-6]* from matching 2.10.
Backward-compatibility is not an argument to make it solaris2.10: it
*will* expose brokenness. We could do better by using solaris10,
since those that use solaris* will still match, and those that use
2.[0-6]* won't inappropriately match.
--
Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist Professional serial bug killer
More information about the Gdb
mailing list