Neil Bothwick wrote: > On Sat, 11 Apr 2015 10:22:09 -0400, Alan Grimes wrote: > >> And then portage did two things. >> >> 1. It masked emul-linux -- A move that I support, it's time to see that >> go. >> >> 2. It sent out a profile that sets variable ABI_x86 with 32 bit enabled. >> ALARM: ABI_x86 should be set in exactly one place: >> /etc/portage/make.conf and nowhere else. But, nevertheless, ABI_x86 WAS >> set which broke the profile because my system cannot compile 32 bit >> executables. > That seems odd, I use several 64 bit profiles here and all of them have > ABI_X86="64"
Apparently it is treated like a set-object and 32 bit is added, by the latest portage without any sanity checking whatsoever. There is a "no-multilib" profile that does not do this. As I said, this variable should be configured in one and only one place, make.conf. That is the only sane solution. The user lays down the law in make.conf and the system tries to obey. If you study what the output of what it is building, there is a very good chance that it enabled abi-32 behind your back. =( -- something it should never do. I thought that lesson had been leaned from the libav fiasco... =\ >> Right now my system is completely unusable and will need fresh stage3 >> packages followed by an emerge emptytree to recover. But before I can do >> that, I need a sane profile > Can't you just set ABI_X86="64 -32" in make.conf? Tried; failed; only works for normal useflags. -- IQ is a measure of how stupid you feel. Powers are not rights.
