| 1 |
On Fri, Jul 07, 2006 at 03:57:51PM -0400, Ned Ludd wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Fri, 2006-07-07 at 20:40 +0200, Harald van Dijk wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Fri, Jul 07, 2006 at 01:55:03PM -0400, Ned Ludd wrote: |
| 4 |
> > > Keep pushing this and the only thing you will end up with is the |
| 5 |
> > > vanilla flag being removed all together.. |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> > Is that a threat? If not, is there a reason behind this? |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Yes.. When users or devs complain non stop when they |
| 10 |
> don't understand something it leaves us with a few choices. |
| 11 |
> 1) put up with people not having a clue. |
| 12 |
> 2) remove the option so they can't bitch about it. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Option #1 is not fun as it pushes the hand on #2 |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Option 3: Enlighten me. I have explained why I feel the way I do, so if |
| 17 |
there's some big flaw in my understanding, please do correct it. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> > > You want a pure 100% |
| 20 |
> > > vanilla(POS) non working toolchain then go download it and |
| 21 |
> > > compile it yourself. You will soon see why things exist the way |
| 22 |
> > > they do.. |
| 23 |
> > |
| 24 |
> > If you mean modifying the build system to actually work properly, then I |
| 25 |
> > have no problem with that. USE=vanilla refers to runtime behaviour, not |
| 26 |
> > the build system. (See use.desc.) Specifically, if patches are applied |
| 27 |
> > that make sure GCC compiles, and those patches make sure GCC compiles to |
| 28 |
> > the same program intended by the GCC devs at that release, those patches |
| 29 |
> > are appropriate, IMO. None of the GCC patches I have problems with are |
| 30 |
> > of this nature. |
| 31 |
> > |
| 32 |
> > If you mean vanilla GCC + build fixes is unusable, then I'd appreciate |
| 33 |
> > an explanation, because as far as I know, it can work just fine as a |
| 34 |
> > system compiler, and plenty of people, at some times myself included, |
| 35 |
> > use it as one. |
| 36 |
> |
| 37 |
> You use the Gentoo modified one. Regardless of what USE= flags you have |
| 38 |
> enabled you are still getting Gentoo behaviors. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
Gentoo isn't the only system I use. I have used vanilla GCC + build |
| 41 |
fixes, and I have been able to get a working system with it. So I'm |
| 42 |
still waiting on your explanation of how it is unusable. |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
> Think vanilla-sources are pure? They are not. |
| 45 |
> They get patched as well with the minimal amount of patches required. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
Interesting, and I did not know that, but looking at kernel-2.eclass |
| 48 |
(which appears to be the only thing doing any modifying), the |
| 49 |
modifications are all build system fixes, and won't affect the generated |
| 50 |
kernel. |
| 51 |
-- |
| 52 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives