| 1 |
On 01/16/2014 03:01 PM, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 2 |
> Dnia 2013-12-28, o godz. 23:58:39 |
| 3 |
> Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> napisał(a): |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> In the multilib stuff, we're using CHOST for two purposes: |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>> 1. wrapped headers are put in /usr/include/$CHOST, |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> 2. multilib executables are prefixed with $CHOST-. |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> (...) |
| 12 |
>> |
| 13 |
>> I'd suggest that you changed the CHOST values to uniquely identify ABI |
| 14 |
>> in use, at least in multilib profiles and preferably in all of them. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> Ping. The discussion seems stalled while we're hitting increasing |
| 17 |
> number of packages that rely on CHOST to run *-config programs. My main |
| 18 |
> is that AFAICS this is the only upstream-compatible way of handling |
| 19 |
> this without hackery on our side. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> As far as I understand, if you changed the CHOSTs only for non-native |
| 22 |
> ABIs (and therefore leaving the prefix used for toolchain unchanged) |
| 23 |
> the risk should be minimal. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Mike suggested creating another variable which was a combination of |
| 27 |
CHOST and ABI for the multilib stuff. Why can't you pursue that approach? |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
Anthony G. Basile, Ph. D. |
| 31 |
Chair of Information Technology |
| 32 |
D'Youville College |
| 33 |
Buffalo, NY 14201 |
| 34 |
(716) 829-8197 |
Archives