From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 20 21:48:03 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEB0D16A418 for ; Tue, 20 Nov 2007 21:48:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wmoran@potentialtech.com) Received: from mail.potentialtech.com (internet.potentialtech.com [66.167.251.6]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF73913C465 for ; Tue, 20 Nov 2007 21:48:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wmoran@potentialtech.com) Received: from vanquish.pitbpa0.priv.collaborativefusion.com (pr40.pitbpa0.pub.collaborativefusion.com [206.210.89.202]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.potentialtech.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4B4CEBC85; Tue, 20 Nov 2007 16:48:02 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 16:48:01 -0500 From: Bill Moran To: Tino Engel Message-Id: <20071120164801.124a585c.wmoran@potentialtech.com> In-Reply-To: <4743554C.9090103@web.de> References: <20071120094009.B630@prime.gushi.org> <20071120115847.e3052dbc.wmoran@potentialtech.com> <4743554C.9090103@web.de> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.4 (GTK+ 2.10.14; i386-portbld-freebsd6.2) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Dan Mahoney, System Admin" , questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: What's "unknown" about i386-unknown? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 21:48:04 -0000 In response to Tino Engel : > Bill Moran schrieb: > > In response to "Dan Mahoney, System Admin" : > > > > > >> Hey all. > >> > >> I see i386-unknown as a build target all the time. > >> > >> So my (possibly silly) question is: what's the unknown variable here? And > >> why isn't it? > >> > > > > I seem to remember a conversation about this, and that the original > > spec for that string required a "physical location" after the architecture. > > > > I'm guessing that at the time it was very important to know which of > > the few physical machines did the job. > > > > If my memory is reliable, it's not that the information is "unknown", it's > > just that nobody cares any more, therefore nobody bothers to enter the > > physical location information. > > > > Well, I actually have i386-portbld-7,0-BETA3. > How does that fit? Don't know. It's entirely possible that I'm remembering wrong. -- Bill Moran http://www.potentialtech.com