Re: [gentoo-dev] [Bug 89729] configure always print a warning message about possibly mistaking build system type
On Wednesday 20 April 2005 23:04, Paul Varner wrote: > On Wed, 2005-04-20 at 09:52 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On Wednesday 20 April 2005 08:27 am, Harald van DÄk wrote: > > > Perhaps > > > make.conf.example (that's provided by portage, right?) should include > > > CBUILD, assuming it doesn't cause problems? > > > > i'm afraid the possibility of users botching this makes it not worth the > > effort > > > > better to keep the definition of CBUILD 'hidden' from most eyes > > As a user, I had the same thought. Why not have portage set it > appropriately unless the user has explicitly defined it? That of course > is making the assumption that someone who has explictly set the CBUILD > variable knows what they are doing, since they had to go through the > trouble of learning about it and the fact that they could set it. Already done about an hour ago. :) Regards, Jason Stubbs -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] [Bug 89729] configure always print a warning message about possibly mistaking build system type
On Wed, 2005-04-20 at 09:52 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Wednesday 20 April 2005 08:27 am, Harald van DÄk wrote: > > Perhaps > > make.conf.example (that's provided by portage, right?) should include > > CBUILD, assuming it doesn't cause problems? > > i'm afraid the possibility of users botching this makes it not worth the > effort > > better to keep the definition of CBUILD 'hidden' from most eyes As a user, I had the same thought. Why not have portage set it appropriately unless the user has explicitly defined it? That of course is making the assumption that someone who has explictly set the CBUILD variable knows what they are doing, since they had to go through the trouble of learning about it and the fact that they could set it. Regards, Paul -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] [Bug 89729] configure always print a warning message about possibly mistaking build system type
On Wednesday 20 April 2005 08:27 am, Harald van DÄk wrote: > Perhaps > make.conf.example (that's provided by portage, right?) should include > CBUILD, assuming it doesn't cause problems? i'm afraid the possibility of users botching this makes it not worth the effort better to keep the definition of CBUILD 'hidden' from most eyes -mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] [Bug 89729] configure always print a warning message about possibly mistaking build system type
Jason Stubbs wrote: > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89729 > > Who's bug is this? I was going to bounce it back to bug-wranglers, but I'm > guessing it would just bounce around after that. What's the cause? CHOST? If > someone wants to take ownership, go for it. Yep, that's CHOST. More specifically, it's caused by including CHOST but not including CBUILD in /etc/make.conf (since they are translated to the --host=* and --build=* configure options, if specified), and adding CBUILD to /etc/make.conf will make the warning go away. Perhaps make.conf.example (that's provided by portage, right?) should include CBUILD, assuming it doesn't cause problems? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
