| 1 |
On Sun, 23 Sep 2012 18:31:25 +0200 |
| 2 |
Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Sun, 23 Sep 2012 12:47:44 -0300 |
| 5 |
> Alexis Ballier <aballier@g.o> wrote: |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> > On Sun, 23 Sep 2012 09:21:20 +0200 |
| 8 |
> > Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > > On Sat, 22 Sep 2012 21:46:02 -0300 |
| 11 |
> > > Alexis Ballier <aballier@g.o> wrote: |
| 12 |
> > > |
| 13 |
> > > > On Sat, 22 Sep 2012 23:24:46 +0200 |
| 14 |
> > > > Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 15 |
> > > > |
| 16 |
> > > > > It is a simple eclass using autotools out-of-source builds to |
| 17 |
> > > > > build packages for multiple ABIs when multilib is supported. |
| 18 |
> > > > > |
| 19 |
> > > > |
| 20 |
> > > > to some extent, can't you do the same by unpacking twice to |
| 21 |
> > > > different $S and calling src_prepare/compile/install instead of |
| 22 |
> > > > their autotools-utils counterpart with tweaked $S so that it |
| 23 |
> > > > works with almost every ebuild ? |
| 24 |
> > > |
| 25 |
> > > That would make this solution inefficient. |
| 26 |
> > |
| 27 |
> > Why ? |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> Because it introduces unnecessarily copying files around. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
cp -l ? I can live with that. |
Archives