Gentoo Archives: gentoo-mips

From: "Michał Górny" <mgorny@g.o>
To: gentoo-mips@l.g.o
Cc: basile@××××××××××××××.edu
Subject: Re: [gentoo-mips] On MIPS using the same CHOST for all multilib ABIs
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 21:24:28
Message-Id: 20140116222418.6229a1b0@pomiot.lan
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-mips] On MIPS using the same CHOST for all multilib ABIs by "Anthony G. Basile"
1 Dnia 2014-01-16, o godz. 16:05:24
2 "Anthony G. Basile" <basile@××××××××××××××.edu> napisał(a):
3
4 > On 01/16/2014 03:01 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
5 > > Dnia 2013-12-28, o godz. 23:58:39
6 > > Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> napisał(a):
7 > >
8 > >> In the multilib stuff, we're using CHOST for two purposes:
9 > >>
10 > >> 1. wrapped headers are put in /usr/include/$CHOST,
11 > >>
12 > >> 2. multilib executables are prefixed with $CHOST-.
13 > >>
14 > >> (...)
15 > >>
16 > >> I'd suggest that you changed the CHOST values to uniquely identify ABI
17 > >> in use, at least in multilib profiles and preferably in all of them.
18 > >
19 > > Ping. The discussion seems stalled while we're hitting increasing
20 > > number of packages that rely on CHOST to run *-config programs. My main
21 > > is that AFAICS this is the only upstream-compatible way of handling
22 > > this without hackery on our side.
23 > >
24 > > As far as I understand, if you changed the CHOSTs only for non-native
25 > > ABIs (and therefore leaving the prefix used for toolchain unchanged)
26 > > the risk should be minimal.
27 > >
28 >
29 > Mike suggested creating another variable which was a combination of
30 > CHOST and ABI for the multilib stuff. Why can't you pursue that approach?
31
32 Because AC_PATH_TOOL uses CHOST and some random Gentoo invention.
33
34 --
35 Best regards,
36 Michał Górny

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-mips] On MIPS using the same CHOST for all multilib ABIs "Anthony G. Basile" <blueness@g.o>