Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Aron Griffis <agriffis@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [brad@mainstreetsoftworks.com: Re: 64-bit.eclass]
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 20:02:47
Message-Id: 20031211020245.GD2313@time
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] [brad@mainstreetsoftworks.com: Re: 64-bit.eclass] by Aron Griffis
1 Brad,
2
3 Aron Griffis wrote: [Wed Dec 10 2003, 08:28:35PM EST]
4 > I personally have marked quite a few with append-flags just because I
5 > don't have the time to fix it 'right', and the users would rather see
6 > it compile at all than to have it not because a dev couldn't get to
7 > it.
8
9 Reading over Daniel's email, I don't think Daniel was saying that
10 "append-flags -fPIC" is completely disallowed. I think his point was
11 that my "64-bit && append-flags -fPIC" is not the best way. At the time
12 that I wrote my original email, I thought I was actually doing things
13 the best way, so Daniel's response was very helpful to clear up my
14 misconception (and prevent me from propogating it).
15
16 When fixing individual packages, there's always a trade-off between just
17 making things work, and taking the time to actually develop a correct
18 solution for the package in question. In each case, it's going to come
19 down to how much time the developer has, and whether or not it's worth
20 pursuing the complete fix...
21
22 In the end, though, the best thing is to get it right and push the fix
23 upstream so that there's less future work for us to do. ;-)
24
25 Aron
26
27 --
28 Aron Griffis
29 Gentoo Linux Developer (alpha / ia64 / ruby / vim)
30 Key fingerprint = E3B6 8734 C2D6 B5E5 AE76 FB3A 26B1 C5E3 2010 4EB0