Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Michael Weber <xmw@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] netsurf.eclass proposal
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 14:31:29
Message-Id: 51C31234.2020607@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] netsurf.eclass proposal by Mike Gilbert
1 On 06/19/2013 06:23 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
2 > I guess the follow-up question is this:
3 >
4 > Are there any consumers of these libraries which require the 32-bit
5 > (x86) ABI to be installed?
6 No ... t jet. And not that likely to arise, but I'm out of crystal balls
7 ;-) .
8
9 > I'm all for having fun, but I think the intent was to keep the
10 > multilib-build eclass usage to a minimum.
11 Sorry, I've missed that agreement, can you point me to it, please?
12
13 > Otherwise, you'll end up installing libraries that will never be used.
14 Same goes for all corner cases of emul-linux-members.
15
16 Turning abi_x86_32 on/off in a global scale is a decision to be made by
17 the user. With all consequences (initial compile time vs recompiles on
18 reconsiderations). It doesn't make that difference if turned off.
19 But if needed, it's just there.
20
21 [Said that, I hope it doesn't propagate -abi_x86_32 down the dep tree.]
22
23 [And I seriously doubt that any user has the patience to watch us
24 migrate the tree on a per-request basis. Let's be honest then and
25 abandon it. -- not my standpoint, under given circumstances of
26 ready-to-use implementation.]
27
28 Michael
29
30 --
31 Michael Weber
32 Gentoo Developer
33 web: https://xmw.de/
34 mailto: Michael Weber <xmw@g.o>

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] netsurf.eclass proposal Mike Gilbert <floppym@g.o>