On Sun, 01 Jul 2012 15:30:44 -0700 Zac Medico <zmed...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 07/01/2012 02:34 PM, Thomas Sachau wrote: > > Zac Medico schrieb: > >> On 07/01/2012 04:29 AM, Thomas Sachau wrote: > >>> Matt Turner schrieb: > >>>> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Thomas Sachau > >>>> <to...@gentoo.org> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> I'm interested in this because I'm regularly annoyed with the > >>>> emul- packages and also because multilib is pretty important for > >>>> mips. > >>>> > >>>>> If a package has dependencies, then those dependencies are > >>>>> required to have at least the same targets enabled as the > >>>>> package > >>>> > >>>> That seems like the obvious (but perhaps naive) choice. What > >>>> about depending on packages that don't install libraries, like > >>>> x11-proto/ packages or generators like dev-util/indent? > >>>> > >>>> Maybe I just don't understand. Would these packages even have > >>>> ABI flags? > >>> > >>> All packages do get the ABI flags (with the needed EAPI or via > >>> enabled portage feature, which is currently in the multilib > >>> branch). > >>> > >>> If a package does not install anything ABI-specific (no headers, > >>> no libs and no binaries), then there is no overhead, since it > >>> will just get compiled/installed for one ABI, even if multiple > >>> ABI flags are enabled. > >> > >> For a package like this that does not install anything > >> ABI-specific, does the package manager still execute phases for > >> each enabled ABI, or is there some way for the ebuild to indicate > >> whether or not its phases need to be executed for each enabled ABI? > >> > > > > > > This is dynamicly checked at runtime, no need to modify the ebuilds > > and also no needless compilation, when there is no ABI-specific > > content. > > > > A more detailed answer at package manager level: > > After the src_install phase for the first requested ABI has been > > finished, the content of $DESTDIR is checked. If there is no ABI > > specific content, the other enabled ABIs are skipped and the > > following steps are done as usual. > > In case anyone want some more detail, here's a follow-up question > from irc: > > <zmedico> Tommy[D]: does any ELF executable qualify as "abi specific" > and trigger builds for all ABIs? > <Tommy[D]> zmedico: if it goes into any > of /bin /usr/bin /sbin /usr/sbin and you enable the abiwrapper USE > flag, yes, otherwise you just request a binary for the default ABI, > so no need to rebuild everything for no need How about executables which go into /lib or /libXX? -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
