[uClibc] Re: More on config.guess.

[Dan Kegel]

Paul Smith wrote:
> %% Rob Landley <rob at landley.net> writes:
> 
>   rl> I mentioned earlier that config.guess seems to originate from
>   rl> autoconf.
> 
> That's not really true.  Many packages, including autoconf, provide
> config.guess, but the master copy is kept in the "config" project in
> Savannah (https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/config/), along with
> config.sub, etc.

uclibc is in the master copy, too:

http://savannah.gnu.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs/config/config/config.sub.diff?r1=1.292&r2=1.293

>   rl> (I'm curious why patch, sed, or grep would really care about any
>   rl> of this...)
> 
> Its hard to know, but a number of autoconf macros rely on the values
> generated by config.guess.

Oddly, config.guess doesn't contain the string 'uclibc' or 'uclinux'.
Wonder what it outputs when running on a uclibc system...

Here's some discussion from when Bernardo was picking the system name:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-09/msg01136.html
which notes that *-uclinux-uclibc is a good tuple which is significantly
different from *-linux-uclibc in that it uses flat ELF files
rather than normal ones.

Does anyone know if any program needs to behave differently for *-linux-uclibc
as opposed to *-linux-gnu (besides gcc)?  I imagine it might
change a couple defaults in the cross-compile case for some autoconf tests,
at least...
- Dan