| 1 |
W dniu sob, 03.03.2018 o godzinie 22∶51 +0900, użytkownik Benda Xu |
| 2 |
napisał: |
| 3 |
> Hi Michał, |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> writes: |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> > > I am sure you are aware that Prefix has two variants: one is |
| 8 |
> > > prefix-rpath targeting MacOS, Solaris, AIX, Cygwin, Interix and a subset |
| 9 |
> > > of GNU/Linux; the other is prefix-standalone, targeting GNU/Linux and |
| 10 |
> > > Android/Linux.[1] |
| 11 |
> > > |
| 12 |
> > > For LLVM example, it is prefix-rpath, which hosts its own overlay at |
| 13 |
> > > repo/proj/prefix.git. Besides LLVM there are other hacks at present in |
| 14 |
> > > the overlay. But we still keep the ultimate goal of merging prefix.git |
| 15 |
> > > into gentoo.git. |
| 16 |
> > |
| 17 |
> > I am also keeping old versions of LLVM for Prefix team. That's why I'd |
| 18 |
> > really prefer to get rid of them and have them in some common overlay |
| 19 |
> > that all Prefix users can use. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> Yes that's true. The case of LLVM for prefix-rpath is similar as glibc |
| 22 |
> for prefix-standalone. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> For the argument of overlay refer to the message below vvv |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> > > What we are discussing in this thread, however, is prefix-standalone, it |
| 27 |
> > > uses the official gentoo repository without any overlay. It works |
| 28 |
> > > perfectly for kernel-2.6.26+ and linux-3.2+. So, creating an overlay of |
| 29 |
> > > 2 ebuilds for prefix-standalone is an overkill. |
| 30 |
> > |
| 31 |
> > Maybe it is. But isn't making maintenance of Gentoo packages more |
| 32 |
> > complexity for Prefix an overkill? We are effectively switching |
| 33 |
> > from trivial model of 'assign bug with X to maintainer' to checking |
| 34 |
> > which maintainer applies to which version of X. |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> I am on the toolchain alias, and I am interested in joining the project. |
| 37 |
> I will be responsible to deal with all the bugs for glibc-2.16 and |
| 38 |
> glibc-2.19. Bug wranglers' work load does not change. |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
> Yes, I apologize this will generate some noise for toolchain@g.o. But I |
| 41 |
> anticipate people on the team are interested in receiving those emails. |
| 42 |
> |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
That's not a solution. That's cheap a cheap excuse that works for one |
| 45 |
package, for today. It does not solve the generic case, it does not mean |
| 46 |
that other members of toolchain or any other team will not end up having |
| 47 |
to remember extra rules like 'do not remove this ebuild because X wants |
| 48 |
it'. |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
-- |
| 51 |
Best regards, |
| 52 |
Michał Górny |
Archives