[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [MiNT] GnuPG

To: unlisted-recipients:; (no To-header on input)
Subject: Re: [MiNT] GnuPG
From: Martin-Eric Racine <q-funk@pp.fishpool.fi>
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 16:38:00 +0300
Cc: MiNT List <mint@fishpool.com>
In-reply-to: <Pine.MNT.4.10.9909161412140.104-100000@localhost>
Sender: owner-mint@fishpool.com

> From: Steven Moore <smooreg@essex.ac.uk> 

> Even configure didn't run, which worried me slightly. On closer
> inspection, that turns out to be down to it not knowing the
> architecture "m68k-atari-mint"

Since most Configure scripts currently expect something along the 
lines of "m68k-atari-mint" then we should ensure this becomes the
norm, but then again, do we have any assurances about which 'uname'
options are expected to reply with that string?  If yes, then this
should be added to the "porting stuff for MiNT" FAQ.

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Martin-Éric Racine            The Atari Stacy and TT030 Homepage
Lappeenranta, Finland          http://members.tripod.com/~TT030/
----------------------------------------------------------------
   "When the time comes, I will know and I shall be."  Q-Funk

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [MiNT] GnuPG
  - From: Frank Naumann <fnaumann@prinz-atm.CS.Uni-Magdeburg.De>
- Re: [MiNT] GnuPG
  - From: Guido Flohr <gufl0000@stud.uni-sb.de>

References:
- Re: [MiNT] GnuPG
  - From: Steven Moore <smooreg@essex.ac.uk>

Prev by Date: [MiNT] CT2 and MiNT, solved...?
Next by Date: [MiNT] GnuPG
Previous by thread: Re: [MiNT] GnuPG
Next by thread: Re: [MiNT] GnuPG
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread