| 1 |
Stephen Bennett wrote: |
| 2 |
> Stuart Longland wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> So the profiles would become; |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>>> /usr/profiles/default-linux/mips: |
| 8 |
>>> |- be -- Big Endian Systems |
| 9 |
>>> | |- n32 \__ Profile for any 64-bit voodoo |
| 10 |
>>> | |- n64 / |
| 11 |
>>> | |- ip22 -- SGI Indy, Indigo2 (R4k), Challenge S w/ o32 |
| 12 |
>>> | | |= n32 -- importing the ../n32 voodoo |
| 13 |
>>> | | |- n64 -- importing the ../n64 voodoo |
| 14 |
>>> | | '- 2.4 -- with kernel 2.6 stuff masked (for R4600) |
| 15 |
>>> | | |
| 16 |
>>> |
| 17 |
> Profiles don't do multiple inheritance. You'll either end up duplicating |
| 18 |
> n32/n64 in all the relevant subprofiles, in which case why bother with |
| 19 |
> be/n32, or the ip22/n32 profile won't inherit from ip22/, which kinda |
| 20 |
> defeats the point, no? |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
That's a fly in the ointment, yes. I spose that means removing the |
| 23 |
toplevel n32 and n64 profiles. This does mean duplication of files, |
| 24 |
which is probably it's biggest downside -- but it gives us the greatest |
| 25 |
flexibility IMHO. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
In fact, there's an idea for profiles... why not have multiple |
| 28 |
inheritance? It'd be something to bring up with the portage devs I |
| 29 |
think, but it may have some useful features. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Certainly though, at the very least, we should split according to |
| 32 |
endianness and userland. That way, CHOST and other vars can be set |
| 33 |
correctly. |
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
____ _ Stuart Longland (a.k.a Redhatter) |
| 36 |
/ _ \ ___ ___ __| |__ __ __ Gentoo Linux/MIPS Cobalt and Docs |
| 37 |
- (_) \ / \ ; \(__ __)/ \ / \ Developer |
| 38 |
\ // O _| / /\ \ | | | /\ | /\ | |
| 39 |
/ / \ /__| / \ \ | | | \/ | \/ | |
| 40 |
(___/ \____/|_; |_| \_/ \__/ \__/ http://dev.gentoo.org/~redhatter |
Archives