1 |
On Tue, 15 Jan 2013 14:42:27 -0300 |
2 |
Alexis Ballier <aballier@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> On Tue, 15 Jan 2013 18:25:16 +0100 |
5 |
> Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
6 |
> |
7 |
> > On Tue, 15 Jan 2013 14:19:36 -0300 |
8 |
> > Alexis Ballier <aballier@g.o> wrote: |
9 |
> > |
10 |
> > > On Tue, 15 Jan 2013 08:31:46 +0100 |
11 |
> > > Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
12 |
> > > |
13 |
> > > > Although the eclass does 'multilib?' only now, in the future it is |
14 |
> > > > likely to use more fine-tuned ABI flags. |
15 |
> > > > --- |
16 |
> > > > gx86/eclass/autotools-multilib.eclass | 12 ++++++++++++ |
17 |
> > > |
18 |
> > > I think it'd better fit in a more generic eclass like |
19 |
> > > multilib.eclass |
20 |
> > |
21 |
> > Yes, I was thinking about that. Probably would be easy to move |
22 |
> > the relevant functions into it. |
23 |
> > |
24 |
> > The name remains the question -- multilib-utils? :D |
25 |
> |
26 |
> I'd say multilib.eclass; it probably doesn't deserve a new eclass, and |
27 |
> multilib.eclass is already what could be called multilib-utils.eclass :) |
28 |
|
29 |
But that variable requires IUSE... and adding IUSE to multilib.eclass |
30 |
seems like a bad idea to me. |
31 |
|
32 |
I was saying 'multilib-utils' as with the common mistake started with |
33 |
'cmake-utils', and then forked as 'autotools-utils' (because |
34 |
'autotools' was taken, I guess). |
35 |
|
36 |
-- |
37 |
Best regards, |
38 |
Michał Górny |