| 1 |
Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@g.o> posted 44EA17DE.6050503@g.o, |
| 2 |
excerpted below, on Mon, 21 Aug 2006 13:30:22 -0700: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Herbie Hopkins wrote: |
| 5 |
>> I'm not sure why /emul was originally chosen though it's a choice I've |
| 6 |
>> just gone along with whilst maintaining these packages. I've always |
| 7 |
>> viewed the emul libs as a temporary measure until we had full multilib |
| 8 |
>> fuctionality in portage. Afaik the only person working on this was |
| 9 |
>> eradicator who has been mia for a while now so I'm unsure weather this |
| 10 |
>> is ever likely to arise. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> blubb was working on this but ran out of time for it or something, he |
| 13 |
> wrote a proto-GLEP that I've got lying around. I'm thinking of seeing |
| 14 |
> what I can do because the current situation really annoys me, even |
| 15 |
> though I don't have a multilib box. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
FWIW, eradicator active once again. |
| 18 |
eselect-compiler: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=143697 |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
BTW @ jakob and antarus re comment #18, 21: While I understand and don't |
| 21 |
disagree with toolchain's eselect-compiler masking, for some of us on |
| 22 |
amd64 and already used to dealing with its quirks, eselect-compiler is |
| 23 |
less the "broken thing" than gcc-config-1* was. After all, there'd have |
| 24 |
never been a need for eselect-compiler if gcc-config wasn't broken re dual |
| 25 |
bitness in the first place. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
| 29 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
| 30 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives