bug#19111: 25.0.50; 32 bits temacs.exe is linked with wrong image-base when built on 64 bit Windows host

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2014 19:22:47 +0100
> From: Dani Moncayo <dmoncayo@gmail.com>
> Cc: 19111@debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> > Why do you think it isn't canonical?
> 
> $host is not guaranteed to be canonical, because its (final) value is
> not produced by our AC_CANONICAL_HOST.
> 
> > For that matter, what is your
> > definition of "canonical" in this context?
> 
> The value of $host produced by AC_CANONICAL_HOST.

That's an arbitrary definition, which I think is unnecessarily
restrictive.

> > Verification of the canonical configurations is the job of the
> > config.sub script.
> 
> IIUC, the job of config.sub is verification/canonization of
> configurations supplied explicitly as parameters in the configure
> script (--host, --build).

I don't think I agree.  What is your basis for that assertion?

> I think that the "w64" manufacturer reveals that something is not
> quite right, because, when no --host and --build are specified, the
> canonical configuration should be the one produced by config.guess,

Ideally, yes.  But that's not really necessary, if the MANUFACTURER
part doesn't affect the build (as it is in this case).

> > I don't think we need that, since what we have now uses perfectly
> > valid canonical configuration types.  In any case, if you still are
> > unconvinced, the way to fix this is to submit patches for config.sub,
> > so that it does this mapping automatically.  Its that script's job,
> > not ours.
> 
> I agree with the above, after replacing 'config.sub' with
> 'config.guess'.

config.guess just calls 'uname'.

> But in summary: IMO, the right fix for this seems to be in
> config.guess, which returns the wrong CPU on certain MSYS environments
> (#3 and #4 in my previous mail).

I don't object to making such a change in config.guess, but I still
think replacing -w64- with -pc- is not really necessary, as the former
does no harm, and most probably never will.