Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] multilib-build.eclass and restricting unsupported ABIs

[Thomas Sachau]

Alexis Ballier schrieb:
> On Thu, 07 Mar 2013 19:59:35 +0100
> Thomas Sachau <tommy@g.o> wrote:
>>
>> I dont have a list of binaries, i either noticed myself some
>> abi-specific behaviour or got user reports for abi-specific behaviour.
>> As an example i remember, dev-libs/libIDL has a config binary not
>> matching the usual *-config scheme (libIDL-config-2), so instead of
>> adding a random list of patterns, i simply added that package to the
>> list of packages with wrapped binaries. The same applies to mysql,
>> which has a mysql_config binary.
>
> Ok, so those make perfect sense for being wrapped and should be done
> per-binary not per-package: We do not really want to wrap all mysql
> binaries just for mysql_config.
> Ebuilds should declare the binaries they want to be wrapped, so we can
> grep the tree for getting a list of what to fight against if we want a
> cleaner multilib system :)

This is possible, but will make the solution more complex or limited
(either the solution does not allow users to opt-in for wrapping all
binaries of a package or you need an additional option for users to
opt-in beside the variable, which includes the needed binaries).

>
>> I am not sure about the target of your qmake question, so as a general
>> answer:
>>
>> qmake is something like configure for qmake based build systems. If
>> you want to see the difference between qmake (32bit) and qmake
>> (64bit), run a 64bit qmake on a qmake based package and do the same
>> with a 32bit qmake and check the difference between the 2 runs.
>
> Well, I'm asking this because I don't have access to a 32bit qmake
> here so a diff of the files generated by the two will be useful :P And I
> believe it makes sense to study in details this case to understand
> whether we want to wrap it or not. As Davide said, it is likely that
> overriding the correct variable may make qmake output not abi-specific.
> The difference between g++-64 and g++-32 qmake mkspec is only a -m32 vs
> -m64 cflag which I think is overridden elsewhere in our ebuilds so this
> should not matter much.

If you want an example diff, can you point me to a small qmake based
package?
For the difference: It might work with mkspec files installed per-abi,
but i did not have a close look at it, so cannot say for sure. Maybe
someone from qt herd can give you a clear answer on the abi-specific
content inside qmake, which is used to generate the makefiles.


-- 

Thomas Sachau
Gentoo Linux Developer