| 1 |
On Thu, 06 Jul 2006 17:09:42 +0200 Simon Stelling <blubb@g.o> |
| 2 |
wrote: |
| 3 |
| Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 4 |
| > You can do it through bashrc. But then, if this is about working |
| 5 |
| > around Portage's annoying lack of sane cross compile handling, why |
| 6 |
| > not put a little effort into fixing it properly rather than a lot |
| 7 |
| > of effort into making the tree more complicated? |
| 8 |
| |
| 9 |
| Err, I think you're mixing up different things. How should portage be |
| 10 |
| able to do sane cross compiling if you control the instruction sets |
| 11 |
| through use flags which are blocked in profiles the build system is |
| 12 |
| using? |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
That's just it. You shouldn't be using the wrong profile when compiling |
| 15 |
things. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
| In fact, moving away from use flags over to the real(TM) |
| 18 |
| solution is a step towards fixing the issue. Also, it doesn't make |
| 19 |
| the tree more complicated. It is far more intuitive that supported |
| 20 |
| instruction sets are used if the user doesn't explicitly wish not to |
| 21 |
| than having some strange use flags that don't mean what they're named |
| 22 |
| like. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
That's like saying "well we should just link against whatever's |
| 25 |
available, it's far more intuitive than letting the user decide". |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
| 29 |
Mail : ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives