From: sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann)
Message-Id: <10109241704.AA15111@clio.rice.edu>
Subject: Re: DJGPP & Windows 2000 weelky status report for 23-Sep-2001
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2001 12:04:33 -0500 (CDT)
Cc: h DOT m DOT brand AT hccnet DOT nl (H.Merijn Brand), eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il (Eli Zaretskii)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1010924193139.1793C-100000@is> from "Eli Zaretskii" at Sep 24, 2001 07:33:29 PM
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> > I ask because perls config expects the last element to start with 'pc' for
> > djgpp environments.
> 
> I'm guessing that your uname.exe was built with the CVS library.  The 
> function `uname' in the CVS is much more smart about the CPU type, so it 
> reports i686 instead of the mere pc that was reported with djdev203.
> 
> The Perl config scripts should be updated to know about this change.

Should we return pc686 from CVS library?  I don't see why i686 is any more
informative than pc686, especially if it breaks current code.