Re: Regarding my two patches against config.sub

[Yann Droneaud]

Hi

Le samedi 02 février 2013 à 07:38 +0100, Jan Engelhardt a écrit :
> On Friday 2013-02-01 16:23, Yann Droneaud wrote:
> >
> >The rationale behind this is: 
> >
> >when using ./configure --host=<name>, --build=<name>,--target=<name>,
> ><name> is not the output of config.guess and can be written in
> >upper-case. For example ./configure --host=X86-LINUX
> 
> But the question is: why would anybody want to write X86-LINUX
> instead of x86-linux?
> 

Or why one would not write ARMv8-linux, where ARMv8 is the correct
wording of the architecture.

Or using `uname -p`-`uname -s` would produce x86_64-Linux

The problem happens when I use `uname -p`-`uname -s` as --build=
argument of a configure script while cross-compiling.

config.sub should be a bit more liberal on its input.

Regards.

-- 
Yann Droneaud
OPTEYA