1 |
On Mon, 18 Jun 2012 10:49:37 -0400 |
2 |
Ian Stakenvicius <axs@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
5 |
> Hash: SHA256 |
6 |
> |
7 |
> On 17/06/12 11:53 AM, Michał Górny wrote: |
8 |
> > On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 17:46:00 +0200 Thomas Sachau <tommy@g.o> |
9 |
> > wrote: |
10 |
> >>> |
11 |
> >>> ... If I weren't using 32-bit libs, and now I want to compile |
12 |
> >>> 32-bit wine, I have to recompile most of my libraries for both |
13 |
> >>> ABIs. That is a no go for me. |
14 |
> >> |
15 |
> >> So you want to build a 32bit package, which is depending on |
16 |
> >> 32bit libs, but want to do that without the needed dependencies? |
17 |
> >> Please tell me, how that works. |
18 |
> > |
19 |
> > I'm trying to build a 32bit package and its 32bit dependencies. |
20 |
> > Your solution involves building a 32bit package and rebuilding all |
21 |
> > 64bit packages which happen to be its dependencies for no reason. |
22 |
> |
23 |
> Wait, so a package will be re-emerged but only for the new ABI? So |
24 |
> we're looking at partial package installing now? |
25 |
|
26 |
Not exactly. Rather being able to build multiple packages from a single |
27 |
ebuild. |
28 |
|
29 |
> Or is this going to make multi-ABI installs be more like the way |
30 |
> crossdev works, where each individual package supporting multiple ABIs |
31 |
> will be installed multiple times, independently? |
32 |
|
33 |
Something like this, yet without writing additional ebuilds. |
34 |
|
35 |
-- |
36 |
Best regards, |
37 |
Michał Górny |