Re: request for configure clarifications on darwin10

[Steffen Dettmer]

On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 1:20 AM, Jack Howarth <address@hidden> wrote:
> ps Isn't darwin10 the very first hybrid OS which the configure machinary has 
> been
> faced with? I am unaware of any other operating systems that ever differed the
> architecture of the kernel and the default code execution/generation of the
> default system compiler.

Wasn't BlueGene/L (thread from June, 6th) in a similar situation?
For cross-compiling, isn't --host to be used (instead --target) and
--build=`./config.guess`?

If I understood correctly, this 32 bit machine can execute both 32 and
64 bit code. Why is it assumed that the user wants to build 64 bit
code by default on a 32 bit machine? Just because it is possible? I
think I would expect 32 bit code to be generated. Some other platforms
know possibilities to run different code, too. Under linux, it is even
possible to use WINE in a way, that you can transparently execute
windows .EXE binaries (leading to automatically loading WINE), but I
guess no one will expect configure to default to MinGW code generation
on such platforms :-) Don't know if practical used (and not sure if
I'm correct), but I think inside an ELF binary you could even have
code for several architectures (e.g. i386 and some LP64 or so). To
avoid unexpected effects, shouldn't configure also in this case
default to build code as close as possible to the one of the running
machine?

oki,

Steffen