On 06/05/2011 04:44 PM, Matt Turner wrote:
> Have you looked at Tommy[D]'s work? What do you think needs to happen
> for it to be merged?
I haven't looked at the code in detail, but the idea behind it seems
reasonable. Given the complexity of the issue, I think that it needs to
be approved as a GL
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 9:00 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 06/02/2011 03:04 PM, Matt Turner wrote:
>> For this problem, I think some kind of per-ebuild ABI_DEPENDENT flag
>> should be used to recognize which packages ABI dependencies should
>> apply to. Without thinking about it too hard, it seems lik
On 06/02/2011 03:04 PM, Matt Turner wrote:
> For this problem, I think some kind of per-ebuild ABI_DEPENDENT flag
> should be used to recognize which packages ABI dependencies should
> apply to. Without thinking about it too hard, it seems like perhaps
> only packages in RDEPEND should be considere
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 6:06 AM, justin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> after testing this, and I have to say it mostly works smooth and fine, I
> hit a huge problem.
>
> I wanted to emerge a package which just depends on glibc provided libs
> for the oposite ABI my main ABI is. This specific package has an
> op
El sáb, 29-01-2011 a las 19:56 +0100, Thomas Sachau escribió:
> Am 29.01.2011 19:30, schrieb Pacho Ramos:
> > El sáb, 29-01-2011 a las 13:10 -0500, Nathan Phillip Brink escribió:
> >> On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 06:03:10PM +0100, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hello
> >>>
> >>> I would like to know wha
Am 29.01.2011 19:30, schrieb Pacho Ramos:
> El sáb, 29-01-2011 a las 13:10 -0500, Nathan Phillip Brink escribió:
>> On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 06:03:10PM +0100, Pacho Ramos wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello
>>>
>>> I would like to know what is "blocking" this from landing main tree in
>>> the "near" future, as I r
El sáb, 29-01-2011 a las 13:10 -0500, Nathan Phillip Brink escribió:
> On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 06:03:10PM +0100, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> >
> > Hello
> >
> > I would like to know what is "blocking" this from landing main tree in
> > the "near" future, as I reviewed:
> >
> > http://www.mail-archive.c
On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 06:03:10PM +0100, Pacho Ramos wrote:
>
> Hello
>
> I would like to know what is "blocking" this from landing main tree in
> the "near" future, as I reviewed:
>
> http://www.mail-archive.com/gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org/msg41737.html
>
> and looks like there wasn't major p
El mié, 01-12-2010 a las 19:57 +0100, Thomas Sachau escribió:
> Hi,
>
> i have already written about this some months ago and updated the code in
> relation to the comments
> especially from vapier.
>
> Basicly, it does now first set abi-specific vars (like CC, CFLAGS and others
> (setup_abi_en
On 15/12/10 12:06, justin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> after testing this, and I have to say it mostly works smooth and fine, I
> hit a huge problem.
>
> I wanted to emerge a package which just depends on glibc provided libs
> for the oposite ABI my main ABI is. This specific package has an
> optional suppor
Hi,
after testing this, and I have to say it mostly works smooth and fine, I
hit a huge problem.
I wanted to emerge a package which just depends on glibc provided libs
for the oposite ABI my main ABI is. This specific package has an
optional support for python which would require to have a second
El mié, 01-12-2010 a las 19:57 +0100, Thomas Sachau escribió:
> Hi,
>
> i have already written about this some months ago and updated the code in
> relation to the comments
> especially from vapier.
>
> Basicly, it does now first set abi-specific vars (like CC, CFLAGS and others
> (setup_abi_en
Am 01.12.2010 20:11, schrieb Alexey Shvetsov:
> Well =)
>
> This will be killer feature in gentoo =P
> Also what about more complex arhes than ia32? like mips of ppc?
I cant speak in detail about the other arches, since i dont know them that
much. Basicly, if you can
crosscompile for a different
Am 01.12.2010 20:05, schrieb Fabian Groffen:
> Hi Thomas,
>
> On 01-12-2010 19:57:46 +0100, Thomas Sachau wrote:
>> The current implementation uses a USE-dep like way internally to
>> satisfy the needed dependencies, so that e.g. 32bit libs on a 64bit
>> platform get their required dependencies bu
Well =)
This will be killer feature in gentoo =P
Also what about more complex arhes than ia32? like mips of ppc?
PS also with this feature seems amd64 and x86 can be merged in one
arch (like it was done in kernel) since its only abis of ia32
2010/12/1 Thomas Sachau :
> Hi,
>
> i have already wri
Hi Thomas,
On 01-12-2010 19:57:46 +0100, Thomas Sachau wrote:
> The current implementation uses a USE-dep like way internally to
> satisfy the needed dependencies, so that e.g. 32bit libs on a 64bit
> platform get their required dependencies built with 32bit libs
> installed.
This just means that
Hi,
i have already written about this some months ago and updated the code in
relation to the comments
especially from vapier.
Basicly, it does now first set abi-specific vars (like CC, CFLAGS and others
(setup_abi_env function
in bin/auto-multilib.sh contains the full list), then does build th
17 matches
Mail list logo
