1 |
09.11.2010, 11:59, "Fabian Groffen" <grobian@g.o>: |
2 |
> On 09-11-2010 10:42:41 +0300, Konstantin Tokarev wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
>> š07.11.2010, 18:51, "Konstantin Tokarev" <annulen@××××××.ru>;: |
5 |
>>> šHi all, |
6 |
>>> |
7 |
>>> šIt seems to me like many packages working on ppc-macos are not keyworded |
8 |
>>> šBut package working on ppc and x86-macos or x86_64-macos is likely to be |
9 |
>>> šworking for ppc-macos (also, package working for x86 and ppc-macos will work |
10 |
>>> šon x86-macos, and so on) |
11 |
>>> |
12 |
>>> šMaybe it's worth to add special mode to portage-prefix accepting such keyword |
13 |
>>> šcombinations (e.g., when some option is specified in emerge command line)? |
14 |
>> šAlso, I suppose ppc64-macos = ppc64 && X-macos (X - some other arch). It would |
15 |
>> šbe useful for those who tries ppc64-macos prefix because too few packages are |
16 |
>> škeyworded |
17 |
> |
18 |
> actually none are keyworded ppc64-macos. |
19 |
> |
20 |
> It is not safe to assume that what compiles on ppc(-linux) also compiles |
21 |
> on ppc-macos. šWhile it is likely that *-macos all or none compile, it |
22 |
> is also best to first verify that, before assuming it is. |
23 |
|
24 |
Hmm, I hoped that most of *-macos should at least compile :) |
25 |
(I didn't explore very many packages, but most of ~ppc-macos do compile) |
26 |
|
27 |
|
28 |
-- |
29 |
Regards, |
30 |
Konstantin |