| 1 |
On 09/21/2014 21:12, Anthony G. Basile wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 09/21/14 21:11, Anthony G. Basile wrote: |
| 3 |
>>> Correct me if wrong, but it seems the core problem here is that multilib |
| 4 |
>>> inherits from the o32 base profile. While I think the proper longterm |
| 5 |
>>> fix is |
| 6 |
>>> to have more discrete, modular/pluggable profile components (like OOP and |
| 7 |
>>> multiple base classes), that's not going to happen in Portage for a |
| 8 |
>>> long time. |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>> Not exactly. The problem is that everything inherits from |
| 11 |
>> profiles/arch/mips and currently that forces o32 with mgorny's multilib |
| 12 |
>> stuff. We need to get that out of the way for the other profiles that |
| 13 |
>> inherit it. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Oh wait, maybe we mean the same thing here. I'm not sure. When you say the |
| 16 |
> same base profile, do you mean profile/arch/mips? In that case we are saying |
| 17 |
> the same thing. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
I actually forgot about arch/mips in the profiles. I'll have to dig around in |
| 20 |
there later on. I assumed we (the MIPS team) managed everything MIPS in the |
| 21 |
tree, since -embedded used to compartmentalize everything under their embedded |
| 22 |
profiles. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
The modular profiles bit is a longterm item. I don't know if this mixins thing |
| 25 |
will correct our issues or not. If not, I may just have to dive into Portage |
| 26 |
and write my own profile-parsing code and try my modular idea out to see if |
| 27 |
that really does solve nay problems. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
Joshua Kinard |
| 31 |
Gentoo/MIPS |
| 32 |
kumba@g.o |
| 33 |
4096R/D25D95E3 2011-03-28 |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
"The past tempts us, the present confuses us, the future frightens us. And our |
| 36 |
lives slip away, moment by moment, lost in that vast, terrible in-between." |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
--Emperor Turhan, Centauri Republic |
Archives