From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Feb 16 13:28:44 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41CE016A4CE
	for <amd64@FreeBSD.org>; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 13:28:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from wn1.sci.kun.nl (wn1.sci.kun.nl [131.174.8.1])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0A4E43D1F
	for <amd64@FreeBSD.org>; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 13:28:43 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from adridg@sci.kun.nl)
Received: from wn4.sci.kun.nl [131.174.8.3]  (helo=wn4.sci.kun.nl)
	by wn1.sci.kun.nl (8.12.10/3.61) with ESMTP id i1GLSfni008963;
	Mon, 16 Feb 2004 22:28:41 +0100 (MET)
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 22:28:41 +0100 (MET)
From: Adriaan de Groot <adridg@sci.kun.nl>
To: Gerald Pfeifer <pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.58.0402162037021.63111@acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0402162226320.14531-100000@wn4.sci.kun.nl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: amd64@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: AMD64 and lang/gcc3x on -CURRENT
X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
Reply-To: adridg@cs.kun.nl
List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform <freebsd-amd64.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-amd64>,
	<mailto:freebsd-amd64-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-amd64>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-amd64-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-amd64>,
	<mailto:freebsd-amd64-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 21:28:44 -0000

On Mon, 16 Feb 2004, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>   *** Configuration amd64-portbld-freebsd5.2 not supported
>   Configure in /tmp/a/ports/lang/gcc33/work/build/gcc failed, exiting.
>
> and my gut tells me someone renamed x86_64 to amd64 somewhere without
> making proper adjustment in upstream packages or something like that.

>From things David and/or Peter have written I've gathered the following:

1) AMD didn't give the platform an official name till fairly late
2) Some folks chose amd64
3) Later the muttonheads at the FSF chose x86_64

> This is a heads up that I will shortly mark all affected GCC ports BROKEN,
> unless someone steps forward and fixes this (not by hacking the port, but
> by submitting proper patches upstream, if needed).

I think hacking the port is the only way, since there's such a fundamental
disagreement in what the platform is called (this same problem shows up in
lots of software packages, BTW, like OpenAFS).