Re: [Bug-gnulib] Re: [PATCH] ping on GNU/KFreeBSD patch sent a while ago

[Bruno Haible]

Paul Eggert wrote:
> > If you want to change it, take this up with the FreeBSD developers.
>
> The FreeBSD developers aren't in charge of the strings that
> config.guess uses to name kernels.  These strings are designed for the
> GNU project's convenience.  Why should the FreeBSD developers care, or
> have any say over, whether config.guess calls the FreeBSD kernel
> "kfreebsd" or "freebsd" or "FreeBSD" or "freebsd_kernel" or whatever?

Still the GNU project should ask them for their preferences, in order
to show respect for their work.

Just like we are careful to write "Solaris 7" and not "Solaris 5.7" -
respecting a wish from the Solaris developers. Remember that it alienated
many people when RMS decided that config.guess should spell Linux as
"lignux". Why alienate the *BSD people? They contribute cool tools like
OpenSSH and cool ideas like non-executable stack.

So IMO we should ask the FreeBSD and NetBSD people honestly: "Listen, we
need two different names in order to distinguish the whole system and the
kernel of your system. What are your preferences?" Robert, do you or
RMS already know what there preferences are?

> > And believe me, having ported the first hundreds of software packages to
> > GNU/K*BSD, I have some idea on what I'm talking about.

Can you please tell from your experience (my experience covers only the
first 25 packages of GNU/FreeBSD, so I really wish to know): What is the
approximate percentage of packages which test the $host values
   a) in order to know about some hardware/kernel issues,
   b) in order to know about things tied to libc,
   c) in order to know about things tied to particular userland programs
      or conventions (like the 'make' program's flavour, or the installation
      location of man pages etc)?

Is one of three categories negligible?

Bruno