List Archive: gentoo-dev
Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.c.f. bug 424647
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 06/20/2012 04:54 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 16:50:33 -0400 Richard Yao <email@example.com>
>> On 06/20/2012 04:35 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>>> On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 16:25:30 -0400 Richard Yao
>>> <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>>>> Multilib (and/or multiarch) support The current binaries
>>>> cause a great deal of pain, particularly when a user does not
>>>> want to upgrade something. I had this problem with WINE and
>>>> glibc because I wanted to avoid the reverse memcpy() fiasco
>>>> on my systems. This situation would have been avoided
>>>> entirely if the package manager supported multilib.
>>> This one's unlikely to happen unless someone's prepared to put
>>> in the work.
>> The multilib-portage overlay already has this working.
> But there is no spec, nor is there a developer-centric description
> of it.
>>> So far as I know, every PM relies heavily upon bash anyway
>>> (and can't easily be made not to), so even if developers would
>>> accept having to rewrite all their eclasses, it still wouldn't
>>> remove the dep.
>> Lets address POSIX compliance in the ebuilds first. Then we can
>> deal with the package managers.
> Why? It's highly doubtful the package manglers could switch shells
> even if they wanted to, and even if every ebuild started using EAPI
> 5. It's wasted effort.
Source the ebuild using the system shell, check for WANT_SH. If it
does not exist, proceed. If it does, start over with a different shell.
I do not see any technical problem.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----