On Mon, 2012-10-08 at 11:07 -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > Does simple replacement of config.guess and config.sub constitute a > useful "port" to this previously unencountered target? Yes. The problem is that we have to repeat this process for every package every time we want to bootstrap a new port or system. Or we can change every package to replace config.guess/sub. Or we can change the packaging building process for every distribution to replace config.guess/sub. Or we can just change autoconf so that it creates configure scripts that look for the latest config.guess/sub. I am pursuing all of these approaches, starting at autoconf. > Is there really any viable substitute for re-autotooling the packages, > while modifying configure.ac, Makefiles, and source code as found to > be required? Not as yet, I'm hoping my patch will become that in the very long term. -- bye, pabs http://bonedaddy.net/pabs3/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
