Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: William Hubbs <williamh@g.o>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 13-11-2012
Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2012 18:02:50
Message-Id: 20121108173822.GA3842@linux1
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 13-11-2012 by Alexis Ballier
1 On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 02:07:23PM -0300, Alexis Ballier wrote:
2 > On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 11:38:20 -0500
3 > William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote:
4 >
5 > [...]
6 > > > The end result of this assumption is that the use of
7 > > > gen_usr_ldscript() and the move of libs from /usr/lib to /lib will
8 > > > become deprecated, correct? I think it's pertinent to note this (or
9 > > > whatever other changes will then be requested/required for Council
10 > > > to decide on) within this discussion, if not also within the
11 > > > "plan"..
12 > >
13 > > On Linux, yes, you are correct. I wouldn't propose touching it for the
14 > > *bsd platforms.
15 > >
16 > > Also, once everyone switches over, this deprecation would be
17 > > transparent. The calls to gen_usr_ldscript would be removed from
18 > > ebuilds where possible, and the function itself could be disabled on
19 > > linux. Once this is done, when packages are rebuilt, the libraries
20 > > would migrate back to /usr/lib.
21 >
22 >
23 > (I hadn't seen that thread.)
24 >
25 > Removing it from ebuilds implies touching it for *bsd platforms. A lot
26 > of ebuilds are shared between the g/*bsd and g/linux port, that's
27 > somewhat the point of the whole thing. Of course, there may be
28 > linux-only packages where the calls to gen_usr_ldscript will become
29 > useless, but in general these calls should remain and the function
30 > shall be a no-op on platforms where this is desired.
31
32 That's what I said. The calls could be removed "where possible",
33 meaning linux-only ebuilds. You can tell from the KEYWORDS which
34 ebuilds this would apply to. :-)
35
36 William