Re: Two problems for autoconf(1.NEC SX 2.Cray)

[Paul Eggert]

> From: Jeroen van den Muyzenberg <address@hidden>
> Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 22:39:57 +1100 (EST)
> 
> Good example is OpenLDAP, autoconf used there recognised (incorrectly) our
> Cray as a C90 ('twas good enough). Recent versions of autoconf have dropped
> that.

That's not an Autoconf issue; it's a config.guess issue.  You'll need
to write to the config.guess maintainer, at address@hidden
However, before you do that, please try upgrading to the latest
version at ftp://ftp.gnu.org/pub/gnu/config/, as config.guess has had
several Cray patches in the last few weeks, and perhaps your bug has
been fixed already.


> I am suprised that there is (and I could be interpreting this
> incorrectly) some resistance to including new architecture/OS
> templates.

I don't think that's the issue.  Autoconf generally does not use
templates (i.e. it does not use the config.guess approach).  Instead
of determining whether you're using a Cray or an x86 or whatever,
Autoconf-generated scripts try to see whether your host supports a
particular small feature, and to do so one small feature at a time.

Sometimes the Autoconf philosophy doesn't work for one reason or
another, so it has to fall back on config.guess.  But this is a sign
of weakness, not of strength.  From Autoconf's point of view,
config.guess should be used only as a last resort.