1 |
El sáb, 29-01-2011 a las 19:56 +0100, Thomas Sachau escribió: |
2 |
> Am 29.01.2011 19:30, schrieb Pacho Ramos: |
3 |
> > El sáb, 29-01-2011 a las 13:10 -0500, Nathan Phillip Brink escribió: |
4 |
> >> On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 06:03:10PM +0100, Pacho Ramos wrote: |
5 |
> >>> |
6 |
> >>> Hello |
7 |
> >>> |
8 |
> >>> I would like to know what is "blocking" this from landing main tree in |
9 |
> >>> the "near" future, as I reviewed: |
10 |
> >>> |
11 |
> >>> http://www.mail-archive.com/gentoo-dev@l.g.o/msg41737.html |
12 |
> >>> |
13 |
> >>> and looks like there wasn't major problems (at least commented in this |
14 |
> >>> thread) |
15 |
> >> |
16 |
> >> There are still a number of known build failures, tracked in |
17 |
> >> https://bugs.gentoo.org/alias/portage-multilib . There are probably |
18 |
> >> many more portage-multilib-related build failures which haven't been |
19 |
> >> encountered yet nor reported. Also, even these reported bugs are not |
20 |
> >> necessarily fixed first because they only affect us the minority ;-). |
21 |
> > |
22 |
> > OK, thanks. Maybe bug 306835 should block bug 145737 instead of |
23 |
> > depending on it, not? |
24 |
> |
25 |
> I think, they are mostly dublicates, bug 145737 was the original multilib-portage idea of kanaka, |
26 |
> but he discontinued it. The version of today (bug 306835) does partly base on his work and partly on |
27 |
> the work with the native-multilib eclass from some Gentoo users with some additional changes from me. |
28 |
> |
29 |
> > |
30 |
> >> |
31 |
> >> Most everything is easy to debug and as simple as replacing calls to |
32 |
> >> $(LD) in poorly-written Makefileswith with calls to $(CC), fixing |
33 |
> >> packages which ignore CFLAGS (where we store our -m32) or LDFLAGS |
34 |
> >> (where we now also store -m32 since one's not allowed to require |
35 |
> >> buildsystems to call $(CC) with $(CFLAGS) when objects are being |
36 |
> >> linked into an executable or library). |
37 |
> >> |
38 |
> >> However, packages which use qmake or cmake macros installed by KDE are |
39 |
> >> more difficult to debug and there are other funny issues such as |
40 |
> >> CFLAGS being stored by a library's buildsystem and stored into |
41 |
> >> /usr/share instead of an ABI-dependent directory, breaking packages |
42 |
> >> which use that library... ;-) |
43 |
> >> |
44 |
> >> Also, there are still some decisions/changes to portage-multilib which |
45 |
> >> might be made The most recent idea discussed was: should ${ARCH} |
46 |
> >> useflags (like SRC_URI="x86? ( http://host/my-binari-x86.tar.bz2 )") |
47 |
> >> be replaced with ${ABI} useflags or should we rewrite a bunch of |
48 |
> >> ebuilds in the tree to be multilib-aware? For example: |
49 |
> >> |
50 |
> >> Say we have |
51 |
> >> ABI=x86 |
52 |
> >> ARCH=amd64 |
53 |
> >> |
54 |
> >> Does ``use x86'' return true or do we need to use ``use multilib_abi_x86''? |
55 |
> >> Do detect the true arch, do we need ``use arch_amd64'' or does ``use amd64'' still return true? |
56 |
> >> |
57 |
> > |
58 |
> > Where do you discuss things like this? IRC channel? Mailing-list? |
59 |
> > Thanks :-) |
60 |
> |
61 |
> Most communication is done in #gentoo-multilib-overlay on freenode IRC. I have also created a mail |
62 |
> alias (multilib@g.o), but it is only used for some bugzilla assignments at the moment. |
63 |
> |
64 |
> |
65 |
|
66 |
OK, thanks a lot |