Re: Which is it -pc- or -unknown-
- Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2017 09:25:01 -0400
- From: cyg Simple <cygsimple@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Which is it -pc- or -unknown-
On 10/18/2017 7:26 PM, Steven Penny wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Oct 2017 08:45:11, Marco Atzeri wrote:
>> For a regex pattern you should include both.
>> I do not bore which one is built and distributed on my packages.
>> E.G. on octave
> This is certainly not right. I can understand that we will have some
> discrepancies across packages, but having a different vendor in the same
> is unacceptable. It suggests that x86_64-unknown-cygwin and i686-pc-cygwin
> differ in more ways that one, which they dont. you let it slide, then
> start asking:
I can live with the historical i*-pc-cygwin mishap.
> - where is x86_64-pc-cygwin?
This I cannot live with and the package maintainers need to target
x86_64-unknown-cygwin instead. GCC has a target build of
x86_64-pc-cygwin, it needs corrected!
> - where is i686-unknown-cygwin?
This should never exist under the current scheme. It should always be
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple