| 1 |
> |
| 2 |
> On 02-07-2008 09:38:30 +0200, Markus Duft wrote: |
| 3 |
> > > What do you mean? I would just enable it, rebuild system (wait for |
| 4 |
> +- 2 |
| 5 |
> > > days) if that's ok, commit it, and then remove all append-flags |
| 6 |
> > > -D_ALL_SOURCE stuff. People having a prefix shouldn't notice that, |
| 7 |
> > > should they? New packages they install just should build, and I |
| 8 |
> hope no |
| 9 |
> > > upstream is so stupid to put #ifdef _ALL_SOURCE in their headers |
| 10 |
> like |
| 11 |
> > > Interix does. Quick grepping doesn't show anything like a changing |
| 12 |
> > > definition or something. |
| 13 |
> > |
| 14 |
> > I meant that changing the define makes various configure scripts find |
| 15 |
> different things, and thus may enable (or disable) different code |
| 16 |
> paths, which _could_ in some stupid cases confuse already merged |
| 17 |
> packages, or the new ones, since it expects something from the merged |
| 18 |
> packages they don't provide, since at build time those things weren't |
| 19 |
> there. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> Ok, good point. Then I guess it's either you or me doing it, and just |
| 22 |
> aligning it, that when it's pushed into the tree, we |
| 23 |
> a) make a new bootstrap snapshot |
| 24 |
> b) upload new installers using the newly compiled packages |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> I can do the compilation of system, but maybe that doesn't make much |
| 27 |
> sense since you'll have to build the installers/binpkgs anyway? |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
*sigh* :) okok... i'll do it then. Where can I put the _ALL_SOURCE definition to? |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
> -- |
| 34 |
> Fabian Groffen |
| 35 |
> Gentoo on a different level |
| 36 |
> -- |
| 37 |
> gentoo-alt@l.g.o mailing list |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
-- |
| 41 |
gentoo-alt@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives