On 2 April 2014 07:38, Patrick Lauer <patr...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On 04/01/2014 01:13 PM, Ben de Groot wrote: >> On 1 April 2014 06:16, Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: >>> Hello, all. >>> >>> The late multilib ppc issues made me re-check our stable masks on >>> abi_x86_* flags and, honestly, I'm not sure if we're doing things >>> the right way. >>> >>> That said, I have an alternate idea inspired by the ppc breakage. >>> >>> Your thoughts? >> >> In my opinion your multilib approach introduces an unnecessary degree >> of complexity, which --as has been shown here again-- is prone to >> breakage. > > And it removes any chance of writing ebuilds - I seriously have no idea > how to fix those things now. They are multibuilds, not ebuilds.
This is part of the complexity I mentioned. I significantly raises maintenance costs, and I'm not convinced of the benefit. >> >> It would be best for our beloved distro to revert all the multilib >> changes, and try a different approach, or leave this prone-to-breakage >> implementation to an overlay for the few people who would actually >> benefit from it. >> > As a temporary stage they are kinda okish, maybe ... but ... > > the whole transition strategy has been very very silly and should have > been staged in an overlay. I'd even build-test them and file bugs - just > don't do this salami tactic of one breakage a day. > I'm strongly considering reverting these changes in the packages I maintain. I'm tired of having to deal time and again with multilib breakage. Either that, or someone else can take over primary maintainership. -- Cheers, Ben | yngwin Gentoo developer
