-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Dnia 2013-08-09, o godz. 12:49:21 Ian Stakenvicius <a...@gentoo.org> napisał(a):
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA256 > > On 09/08/13 12:09 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > > Dnia 2013-08-09, o godz. 11:48:07 Ian Stakenvicius <a...@gentoo.org> > > napisał(a): > > > >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 > > > >> On 09/08/13 11:43 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > >>> Dnia 2013-08-09, o godz. 17:32:56 Thomas Sachau > >>> <to...@gentoo.org> napisał(a): > >>> > >>>> As the topic says, when someone converts an ebuild to > >>>> multilib, please dont disable binary building for other ABIs, > >>>> as has already been done for some packages. > >>>> > >>>> This will break e.g. for users who target 64bit toolchain > >>>> and 32bit userland, since those would not get any binaries > >>>> from building for none-default ABIs. > >>> > >>> Then it is a bug that needs to be reported and fixed properly. > >>> And you should report it properly, to the proper people rather > >>> than stating authoritatively that a silly work-around is a > >>> proper solution. > >>> > > > >> I don't think there was anything authoritative about Tommy's > >> post? 'Please' is generally a request, isn't it? > > > > It is a request given by a person not involved with the multilib > > work and a request that is exactly the opposite of what we're > > doing and recommending so far. Plus it's against QA. > > > >> I asked Tommy to post this, because I had the impression that > >> this method (only building libs for non-native_abi) is the > >> perfectly acceptable and proper way to move forward with > >> multilib-build.eclass conversion -- and I figured other dev's > >> might too, as more and more get involved with converting their > >> lib-providing ebuilds to multilib-build et. al.. > > > > And it is the best method. We're not going to regress into > > multilib-portage. > > > > > > ...so, allowing for the ability of 32bit userland with 64bit toolchain > (via, say, setting ABI_X86=32 in make.conf) using the eclasses is just > outright not ever going to happen? Never mind not supporting it, but > essentially not allowing it? Nope. That would require every package to be multilib. The amount of work exceeds the benefit from it. If you really want to play like this, you are either looking for multilib-portage or some hackery in make.conf. - -- Best regards, Michał Górny -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJSBSxbXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXQ1RUJGMjBGOTk2RkIzQzIyQ0M2RkNBNDBC QUJGMUQ1RkY4QzgxMTBBAAoJELq/HV/4yBEKKSoQAIVD0xbGdPdrfLYGTpJWWhOC D8qqPakxtiYFCAX83Go/IQ95Cad0FCvgKnaHaddP5VSvb5z35gd4aPRI1fPjgvVl 8g103kEUDTov3YlIRxRpnC8+65G4fsdqbUgYsNcT4IGapal2sVlgjzNxRy6rWIAT v713IJOYuTiwMzsUSGDXxDWyKlQKOS/KMazMxGJgfVuJgr+6LLO4nNllVAgnkwdJ LsbWfewKFHsq6EHtU3MBl7EffQSMyAG0iKwlAqGooxCC+vJW0mD27/IflN/FDtks 9nuy0nBDdCp6Wa+ON7kCd8huYK7sy9MR7fxsunXZmzUZJqLbfOfBTk0F2/8i7df9 sobbQRizCR2t1yOiT3JmbwqykWxRGxrbqXvJqy22jczaO5/hF8JUG//ZeZnDYb95 3YC8XsmavuwLFuEWm+363K7IOeLNs8MbYulre4nJGz7aIgWlDVynpdZX4r9c1dIU ra755ovt5eOxC92rB7UqiyOUU72Ofnd1xy4PrQsHC1gXwgWvLtDIGc3qjZ6ZN74H q7TMGpupNHRgfO4motnDRULwqS/WQKBiZoliSYNGA0NZz9VeTxa139cKk7ivCjYP g3khoo6w7Ro+aAwlnrXThGKpNFujenY7kSkkWDwNUut65BleY/Edb6PVfsPpoaa3 Yq2jKUSBKrFMmP42JhiQ =C422 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
