Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: justin <jlec@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] My wishlist for EAPI 5
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 07:25:59
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] My wishlist for EAPI 5 by Ciaran McCreesh
On 21/06/12 08:41, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 23:43:36 +0200 > Justin <jlec@g.o> wrote: >> On 20.06.2012 22:35, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: >>> On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 16:25:30 -0400 >>> Richard Yao <ryao@g.o> wrote: >>>> Multilib (and/or multiarch) support >>>> The current binaries cause a great deal of pain, >>>> particularly when a user does not want to upgrade something. I had >>>> this problem with WINE and glibc because I wanted to avoid the >>>> reverse memcpy() fiasco on my systems. This situation would have >>>> been avoided entirely if the package manager supported multilib. >>> >>> This one's unlikely to happen unless someone's prepared to put in >>> the work. >> >> Tommy worked a lot on this and he asked for help to bring his >> proposal/spec/glep into shape. >> We are all aware what this is all about and know that anybody who is >> using multilib would benefit. >> Can't you simply work with him together to get it into what you expect >> it to be instead of pointing out that it isn't? > > In order to do that, it would have to get to the stage where I > understood exactly what changes are needed and why. I'm not convinced > *anyone* understands that yet. > > Writing PMS patches, at least to the level that we can review them, is > only difficult if you don't know what you want changed or why. >
He wants to deprecate the app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-* packages and build it if needed directly from "normal" ebuilds through the package manager. This was stated a couple of times and is not hard to understand, even without PMS patches, GLEPS and so. *anyone* understands that there are cases when the x86 libs are needed and every gentoo package maintainer should understand, that letting the user build their own x86 libs is what we want in ideal case. There is a working implementation as a branch of portage for some time now and people work on it. So two basic things are there, the need and the idea of a working solution. This also means, that people need to have an idea of what is real problem. (And if not, it was asked a couple of times for discussion) Won't it be a good thing, if you instead of showing all of us, that you can tell where people fail to present something in the right way, help and guide them to write the necessary things like PMS patches, GLEPs etc., so that we can proceed in an efficient way? justin


File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] My wishlist for EAPI 5 Homer Parker <hparker@g.o>