| 1 |
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 9:38 PM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." |
| 2 |
<phajdan.jr@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> On 10/27/11 11:03 AM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: |
| 4 |
>> In glibc: DEPEND="gcc[hardened?]" |
| 5 |
>> In gcc: PDEPEND="elibc_glibc? glibc[hardened?]" |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> I even got an OK on #gentoo-hardened, but I just realized that EAPI-0 |
| 8 |
> (that both packages in question use) doesn't allow use deps like |
| 9 |
> [hardened?]. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> I guess bumping the EAPI on those packages is not an option (is it?), so |
| 12 |
> I'm going to do some more experiments to see if there are more possible |
| 13 |
> problems. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
As per council approval in the last meeting, profiles/ is now EAPI 1. |
| 17 |
EAPI 2 usage in profiles was not a blocker due to portage version |
| 18 |
problems, but due to unresolved questions about cat/pkg[use] atoms in |
| 19 |
package.mask etc. Barring those, EAPI 2 would've been approved for |
| 20 |
profiles/ as well. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
So, I honestly see no reason why toolchain should not start using EAPI 2. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
~Nirbheek Chauhan |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Gentoo GNOME+Mozilla Team |
Archives