Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Stratos Psomadakis <psomas@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] x32 fun pants
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 18:09:00
Message-Id: 4E73907A.607@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] x32 fun pants by Markos Chandras
1 On 09/16/2011 06:06 PM, Markos Chandras wrote:
2 > On 09/16/11 10:58, Stratos Psomadakis wrote:
3 > > On 09/16/2011 10:48 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
4 > >> On Thu, 15 Sep 2011 16:35:55 -0400 Mike Frysinger
5 > >> <vapier@g.o> wrote:
6 > >>
7 > >>>> PS why not merge all x86 abis into one keyword? because
8 > >>>> x86_32 x86_64 x86_x32 are only abis of x86. Also we dont have
9 > >>>> different keywords for different mips abis (64bit and 32bit
10 > >>>> ones)
11 > >>> that'd be nice :)
12 > >> Seems even acceptable. Not sane but acceptable. People tend to
13 > >> keyword packages both '~amd64 ~x86' testing them on amd64 only;
14 > >> amd64 users tend to get sad when someone keyworded a package
15 > >> '~x86' only.
16 > >>
17 > >> On the other hand, it'd be good to have ABI sub-keywords then.
18 > >> Something like 'x86:x86 -*' if a package is actually x86-only.
19 > >>
20 > > I guess there are only a few cases where a package should be
21 > > keyworded for eg x86, but not for amd64, so these few cases can be
22 > > handled by p.masks, right?
23 >
24 > > So, we can have a single x86 keyword, and a single x86 'parent'
25 > > profile, and subprofiles for x86(or x86_32), amd64, and x32.
26 >
27 > > I guess it's not that simple, but I think that's how the mips
28 > > profiles work?
29 >
30 > I am a bit confused by your proposal. Do you suggest to drop 'amd64'
31 > and use x86(parent)/amd64(subprofile)(for x86_64) instead?
32 >
33 Yeap.
34
35 And if we're going to use the same keyword for x32/amd64, we can just do
36 it for x86/amd64/x32 too. I don't think that there will be too many
37 differences.
38
39 --
40 Stratos Psomadakis
41 <psomas@g.o>

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature