RE: [gentoo-alt] [PREFIX] Interix _ALL_SOURCE

[Markus Duft]

>
> On 02-07-2008 09:38:30 +0200, Markus Duft wrote:
> > > What do you mean?  I would just enable it, rebuild system (wait for
> +- 2
> > > days) if that's ok, commit it, and then remove all append-flags
> > > -D_ALL_SOURCE stuff.  People having a prefix shouldn't notice that,
> > > should they?  New packages they install just should build, and I
> hope no
> > > upstream is so stupid to put #ifdef _ALL_SOURCE in their headers
> like
> > > Interix does.  Quick grepping doesn't show anything like a changing
> > > definition or something.
> >
> > I meant that changing the define makes various configure scripts find
> different things, and thus may enable (or disable) different code
> paths, which _could_ in some stupid cases confuse already merged
> packages, or the new ones, since it expects something from the merged
> packages they don't provide, since at build time those things weren't
> there.
>

I thought about this again. Maybe we should try, and simply continue with live as if nothing happened after switching. I don't think that there would be too much packages having problems. We should simply keep this change in mind, in case something bad happens. Also I will try and bootstrap an extra prefix from zero to see whether this works with _ALL_SOURCE always defined. All other prefixes, I'll simply leave alone, and update as appropriate, just like always.

Cheers, Markus

> Ok, good point.  Then I guess it's either you or me doing it, and just
> aligning it, that when it's pushed into the tree, we
> a) make a new bootstrap snapshot
> b) upload new installers using the newly compiled packages
>
> I can do the compilation of system, but maybe that doesn't make much
> sense since you'll have to build the installers/binpkgs anyway?
>
>
> --
> Fabian Groffen
> Gentoo on a different level
> --
> gentoo-alt@l.g.o mailing list


-- 
gentoo-alt@l.g.o mailing list