| 1 |
On Tue, 2015-12-01 at 22:58 +0000, James Le Cuirot wrote: |
| 2 |
> Sorry |
| 3 |
[snip] |
| 4 |
> gentle! :) |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Not sure I have anything meaningful to contribute to the discussion |
| 7 |
from a technical perspective at the moment, but I just wanted to voice |
| 8 |
my support for what you're doing with cross: I think Gentoo is setting |
| 9 |
some kind of standard -- or at least exerting a huge influence -- on |
| 10 |
the worldwide group-think about what is possible and/or reasonable to |
| 11 |
expect in cross-buildling frameworks and environments. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Unfortunately, the "standard" we are setting could clearly be higher. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Part of that comes down to a lack of manpower and testing at |
| 16 |
the package level, which is not an easy problem to solve, as it |
| 17 |
arises from the fundamentals of the market for open-source hacking |
| 18 |
labor. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
But what could be solved more readily is that the framework we have |
| 21 |
today conflates some entities and concepts which are unified when |
| 22 |
building locally, but divergent when cross-building. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Unravelling those conflations should help everyone to experience less |
| 25 |
cognitive dissonance and/or head-scratching-befuddlement, which, in |
| 26 |
turn, could lead to a more productive, fun and easy-to-use cross- |
| 27 |
building experience for users and developers alike, without expecting |
| 28 |
any mysterious motivational forces to materialize from nowhere to |
| 29 |
rescue us from the desire to watch TV or go on dates. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Anyhow, I say it's easier, but I know it's still pretty damn hard. So, |
| 32 |
thanks for working on this! |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-gmt |
Archives