| 1 |
On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 10:58:01 +0300 |
| 2 |
Stratos Psomadakis <psomas@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On 09/16/2011 10:48 AM, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 5 |
> > On Thu, 15 Sep 2011 16:35:55 -0400 |
| 6 |
> > Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o> wrote: |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> >>> PS why not merge all x86 abis into one keyword? because x86_32 |
| 9 |
> >>> x86_64 x86_x32 are only abis of x86. Also we dont have different |
| 10 |
> >>> keywords for different mips abis (64bit and 32bit ones) |
| 11 |
> >> that'd be nice :) |
| 12 |
> > Seems even acceptable. Not sane but acceptable. People tend to |
| 13 |
> > keyword packages both '~amd64 ~x86' testing them on amd64 only; |
| 14 |
> > amd64 users tend to get sad when someone keyworded a package '~x86' |
| 15 |
> > only. |
| 16 |
> > |
| 17 |
> > On the other hand, it'd be good to have ABI sub-keywords then. |
| 18 |
> > Something like 'x86:x86 -*' if a package is actually x86-only. |
| 19 |
> > |
| 20 |
> I guess there are only a few cases where a package should be keyworded |
| 21 |
> for eg x86, but not for amd64, so these few cases can be handled by |
| 22 |
> p.masks, right? |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Yes, that's a good idea indeed. +1 for me, and suggest pushing it to |
| 25 |
the Council. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
Best regards, |
| 29 |
Michał Górny |
Archives