Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] toolchain-funcs.eclass / toolchain-glibc.eclass - gcc-6 bugfixes and updates
On Fri, 16 Jun 2017 14:25:02 +0100 "M. J. Everitt" wrote: > On 16/06/17 09:27, Matthias Maier wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 14, 2017, at 18:15 CDT, Matthias Maier > > wrote: > >> Hello all, > >> > >> this is a series of patches against the toolchian-funcs and > >> toolchain-glibc eclasses, most notably > >> > > Pushed. > > > > Best, > > Matthias > > > .. That was quick ... > > I swore there was something in the devmanual about a nice long period > of bikeshedding before changes to eclasses were approved .. > Maintainers are not even required to send their changes to the ML before committing. They do it because they think it makes sense to have some review for eclasses having a wide usage. Sending trivial changes here instead of b.g.o can be seen as spam.
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] toolchain-funcs.eclass / toolchain-glibc.eclass - gcc-6 bugfixes and updates
On Fri, 16 Jun 2017 14:25:02 +0100 "M. J. Everitt" wrote: > .. That was quick ... > > I swore there was something in the devmanual about a nice long period of > bikeshedding before changes to eclasses were approved .. The eclass writing and changes guide is described in devmanual and available at https://devmanual.gentoo.org/eclass-writing/ Namely "Adding and Updating Eclasses" section includes rationale why one should consider that. TL;DR: The goal is to serve both as an announcement and as a chance to spot errors before affecting everyone. Valuable feedback (ideally actionable or supportive) feedback is important to community and individuals as it allows us all to make a step in the right direction. I view existence of bikeshedding centithreads (with zero valuable feedback) as a negative side of Gentoo community as it's a time sink. I suggest not to start and not to contribute to such threads. Unfortunately even rare snarky comments don't work all that well in mailing lists. Thanks for your patience and understanding :) -- Sergei pgpVaB_YUmxyN.pgp Description: Цифровая подпись OpenPGP
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] toolchain-funcs.eclass / toolchain-glibc.eclass - gcc-6 bugfixes and updates
On 16/06/17 09:27, Matthias Maier wrote: > On Wed, Jun 14, 2017, at 18:15 CDT, Matthias Maier wrote: > >> Hello all, >> >> this is a series of patches against the toolchian-funcs and toolchain-glibc >> eclasses, most notably >> > Pushed. > > Best, > Matthias > .. That was quick ... I swore there was something in the devmanual about a nice long period of bikeshedding before changes to eclasses were approved .. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] toolchain-funcs.eclass / toolchain-glibc.eclass - gcc-6 bugfixes and updates
On Wed, Jun 14, 2017, at 18:15 CDT, Matthias Maier wrote: > Hello all, > > this is a series of patches against the toolchian-funcs and toolchain-glibc > eclasses, most notably > > - introducing new tc-enables-pie(), tc-enables-ssp(), >tc-enables-ssp-strong() and tc-enables-ssp-all() functions in >toolchain-funcs compatible with gcc >=6 and clang as a replacement for >the old gcc-specs-* functions (patch 1). > >After this patchset is merged, I will follow up with fixes to a (small) >number of ebuilds and eclasses utilizing the old gcc-specs-* functions >so that we can deprecate those relatively quickly. > > - updates toolchain-glibc to use said new variants and removing obsolete >configuration logic for gcc >=6. [1] > > - enables a number of (upstreamed) security features for glibc-2.25 per >default. [2,3] Pushed. Best, Matthias