From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 20 21:44:55 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 5751716A418 for ; Tue, 20 Nov 2007 21:44:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from elrap@web.de) Received: from fmmailgate01.web.de (fmmailgate01.web.de [217.72.192.221]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CE6D13C459 for ; Tue, 20 Nov 2007 21:44:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from elrap@web.de) Received: from smtp05.web.de (fmsmtp05.dlan.cinetic.de [172.20.4.166]) by fmmailgate01.web.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id A76E9B339587; Tue, 20 Nov 2007 22:44:53 +0100 (CET) Received: from [84.152.173.132] (helo=freebsdangel.de) by smtp05.web.de with asmtp (WEB.DE 4.108 #208) id 1Iuatp-0003Vp-00; Tue, 20 Nov 2007 22:44:53 +0100 Message-ID: <4743554C.9090103@web.de> Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 22:44:44 +0100 From: Tino Engel User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071110) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bill Moran References: <20071120094009.B630@prime.gushi.org> <20071120115847.e3052dbc.wmoran@potentialtech.com> In-Reply-To: <20071120115847.e3052dbc.wmoran@potentialtech.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: elrap@web.de X-Sender: elrap@web.de X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1++//m2MPG5QHnqrzVq8SVA5fXu9dYOZaGNRyx1 zEZjxulmqYMLvENuUddhlf0xa3i6PLI32MqF2xu3+SRKPbv32x mpf5Mucuw= 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 21:44:55 -0000 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?