[PATCH] Bump config.sub and config.guess to latest versions

Hans-Christian Egtvedt hans-christian.egtvedt at atmel.com
Mon Feb 23 11:38:39 UTC 2009

On Mon, 23 Feb 2009 11:49:19 +0100
Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk at redhat.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 2009-02-23 at 11:15 +0100, Hans-Christian Egtvedt wrote:
> > On Mon, 23 Feb 2009 10:20:56 +0100
> > Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk at redhat.com> wrote:

<snipp typo fix>

> > > # make
> > > make: *** No targets specified and no makefile found.  Stop.
> > > 
> > > Thus, atoconf is a requirement. And if it is present,
> > > it will generate new config.sub and config.guess.
> > > 
> > > What am I missing?
> > If you have old config.sub and config.guess on your build machine,
> > the AVR32 architecture is not present, thus the ./configure step
> > will fail to identify the architecture.
> BUT autoreconf REWRITES THESE FILES ANYWAY. At least that is what I
> see.

Yes, autoreconf rewrites them, but grabs them from your distribution.
At least ubuntu does so, by fetching them from /usr/share/automake
directory. On some distributions (old disties) these files are outdated.

> What's the point in correcting these files if they are rewritten by
> autoreconf and thus their "old" contents is irrelevant?

In the releases you do not have to do autoreconf, hence not having
updated config.guess/sub there might make the newer architectures not

Btw: the patch was "old", i.e. before I saw that you removed them
completely from CVS.

> Can you give me exact sequence of commands you use to build strace
> from cvs tree, one which does not work with "bad" config.sub and
> config.guess, but works with updated ones?

I think we agree, but are discussing two sides of the same matter?

I agree with removing them, I just gave a heads up that the build
system for releases needs to have quite new config.sub and config.guess
which autoreconf will copy in to the project.

Best regards,
Hans-Christian Egtvedt

More information about the Strace-devel mailing list