ObListPolicy: I'm not subscribed to debian-bsd, please Cc: me in all replies that you think may concern me. On Fri, 2003-12-12 at 21:58, Joel Baker wrote: > On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 07:49:43PM +0000, Scott James Remnant wrote: > > > > On Thu, 2003-12-11 at 23:39, Joel Baker wrote: > > > > > I'm not entirely certain what else, if anything, is required to make these > > > changes (except updating the web pages, which will obviously have to wait > > > until the normal method of doing so has been restored), since the origional > > > decision on the port name was relatively informal. > > > > > There might be some changes required to autotools-dev and libtool to > > support this platform, depending how they currently decide what makes > > -netbsd-gnu. > > Present in autotools-dev as of 20021130-1 (2002-11-30 CVS grab). I believe > the libtool patches have been accepted, at least by the Debian package, for > some time, but I'd have to go back and double-check whether the changes > were only in my patched copy, the Debian official version, or upstream at > this point. > The only patches that've recently (within the last year) been applied to libtool have been to support knetbsd-gnu, in fact they removed any support for netbsd-gnu which would get treated under netbsd* now. So provided netbsd-gnu works the same as pure netbsd, there shouldn't be a problem, but if it works differently there'll need to be some changes. > They work for the port - the thing they might *not* work for, which I'd > have to review and probably cross-check with Robert, is whether they won't > accidentally start thinking that KNetBSD systems are KLNetBSD (or whatever > it ends up being, augh). > This'd be a config.guess thing (in autotools-dev) which would decide whether a system is *-netbsd-gnu (your work) or *-knetbsd*-gnu (Robert's work). Scott -- Have you ever, ever felt like this? Had strange things happen? Are you going round the twist?
Description: This is a digitally signed message part