1 |
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
2 |
> On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 11:24:00 +0200 |
3 |
> Luca Barbato <lu_zero@g.o> wrote: |
4 |
>> PMS overlords what's your take? |
5 |
> |
6 |
> You need to start by identifying use cases. Are you discussing handling |
7 |
> cross compiling, |
8 |
|
9 |
Yes |
10 |
multilib, |
11 |
|
12 |
Ok |
13 |
C++ / python ABIs |
14 |
|
15 |
Aaaaaargh, ehm, should we really throw them in the mix? anyway let me |
16 |
see if the same rules apply: |
17 |
|
18 |
- they have to reside in a separate path if possible? |
19 |
|
20 |
- the linker must not pick wrong ones in place of the ones you want to use. |
21 |
|
22 |
- an application using a former abi must link depend on stuff from the |
23 |
same place but MAY use stuff from another place. |
24 |
|
25 |
- is up to the loader pick the right paths on execution |
26 |
|
27 |
- the dep resolver should ignore packages built using the other |
28 |
C++/Python abi. |
29 |
|
30 |
The issue is more complex and I just ignored it basically because the |
31 |
library abi mismatch is an error that should be rectified and not |
32 |
something you want and no it isn't because I don't care about binary |
33 |
only stuff right now, it's just because looks like there is already too |
34 |
much meat w/out something that fits just halfway on the constraints. |
35 |
|
36 |
or all of them? Then you |
37 |
> need to identify what packages would need to do to handle those things. |
38 |
|
39 |
All. |
40 |
|
41 |
> Don't even think about the package manager side until you've worked out |
42 |
> what ebuilds would do. |
43 |
|
44 |
autotooled programs more or less are already doing the right thing, non |
45 |
autotools packages supporting cross development may require some |
46 |
additional checks to pass the right target. |
47 |
|
48 |
lu |
49 |
|
50 |
|
51 |
-- |
52 |
|
53 |
Luca Barbato |
54 |
|
55 |
Gentoo/linux Gentoo/PPC |
56 |
http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero |
57 |
|
58 |
-- |
59 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |