1 |
On 09/20/2012 10:34 AM, Ambroz Bizjak wrote: |
2 |
> The question now is, how should this method for checking |
3 |
> --crosscompile be implemented? In particular, we have two options: |
4 |
> |
5 |
> - Environment variable. If so, how to call it? Possible names are |
6 |
> CROSSCOMPILE, GENTOO_CROSSCOMPILE, PORTAGE_CROSSCOMPILE, |
7 |
> ECROSSCOMPILE... For more generic names (CROSSCOMPILE) it needs to be |
8 |
> taken into account that they may inadvertently affect packages. |
9 |
> However environment vars have the benefit that it's easy to pass them |
10 |
> through programs and scripts. |
11 |
> |
12 |
> - Internal function, similar to "use". Probably "is_crosscompile". |
13 |
> This may look nicer and reduces the risk of collisions. |
14 |
|
15 |
Since it's just a boolean flag, we could have a special "crosscompile" |
16 |
USE flag for this, so that the use() function could be used like we |
17 |
currently use it for the "test" USE flag. The flag would be forced on or |
18 |
off based on your configuration, similar to the "test" flag [1], so |
19 |
there wouldn't be any danger of the flag being accidentally enabled or |
20 |
disabled. The flag could be bound to FEATURES=crosscompile, or some |
21 |
other package manager configuration variable. Note that if we add a |
22 |
--crosscompile option to emerge, then we'll also have to add it to the |
23 |
ebuid(1) command, so maybe it's better to forgo the commandline option |
24 |
and just toggle it with a configuration variable like |
25 |
FEATURES=crosscompile. Also, it's conceivable that you could drop the |
26 |
CROSS_HDEPEND variable, in favor of HDEPEND="crosscompile? ( foo )" |
27 |
syntax (somewhat in alignment with Brian Harring's DEPENDENCIES proposal). |
28 |
|
29 |
[1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=373209 |
30 |
-- |
31 |
Thanks, |
32 |
Zac |