1 |
I'm all for the crossdev USE flag... I think there's a lot we can do |
2 |
with it for moving away from crossdev towards a crosscompilation |
3 |
toolchain straight out of portage... |
4 |
|
5 |
First of all, I think we should have a binutils-config package similar |
6 |
to gcc-config so we can switch between different toolchains... then we |
7 |
can put the gcc-config and binutils-config options into |
8 |
/etc/{init,conf}.d/distcc |
9 |
|
10 |
Additionally, it would be nice if the gcc (and in the future, binutils) |
11 |
profiles had the complete gentoo version string for the profile name: |
12 |
x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-3.4.0-r6 instead of x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-3.4.0. |
13 |
|
14 |
Can SLOT be dynamically set yet based on use flags? IIRC, something |
15 |
like the following isn't allowed because we're not supposed to have code |
16 |
in the global section of an ebuild: |
17 |
|
18 |
if use crossdev; then |
19 |
SLOT="${PV}-${CTARGET}" |
20 |
else |
21 |
SLOT="${PV}" |
22 |
fi |
23 |
|
24 |
solar caught me commenting about crossdev stuff in #-dev earlier today, |
25 |
and it looks like I volunteered to help at putting all this together... |
26 |
|
27 |
Does anyone have any suggestions about this? |
28 |
|
29 |
Lisa Seelye wrote: |
30 |
|
31 |
> On Fri, 2004-07-09 at 21:36, Kumba wrote: |
32 |
> |
33 |
>>Said USE Flag would mostly be applicable to gcc, glibc, and binutils. |
34 |
>>Possibly kernel-headers too, if needed. |
35 |
>> |
36 |
>>Any objections? |
37 |
> |
38 |
> |
39 |
> Sounds like a good idea. I can see this being used in conjunction with |
40 |
> distcc for crosscompiling somewhere down the line. |
41 |
> |
42 |
|
43 |
|
44 |
-- |
45 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |