On 03 Jun 2015 10:26, Alexis Ballier wrote:
On Tue, 2 Jun 2015 10:13:54 -0400 Mike Frysinger wrote:
On 01 Jun 2015 10:15, Alexis Ballier wrote:
On Sun, 31 May 2015 11:17:50 -0400 Mike Frysinger wrote:
(3) considering the glibc effort has been stalled for over a year,
(1) is something
On Tue, 2 Jun 2015 10:13:54 -0400
Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 01 Jun 2015 10:15, Alexis Ballier wrote:
On Sun, 31 May 2015 11:17:50 -0400 Mike Frysinger wrote:
(3) considering the glibc effort has been stalled for over a year,
(1) is something we can help accomplish and
On Sun, 31 May 2015 11:17:50 -0400
Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
well if we're going to do arbitrary lists ;)
(1) your options aren't mutually exclusive
(2) implementing both are desirable
good to know your longterm plan :)
however, even if both can be done, i still don't see the
On May 31, 2015 7:33:28 AM PDT, Alexis Ballier aball...@gentoo.org wrote:
I'm not sure what's best for every one:
1. Push hundreds of patches upstream to add lfs flags;
2. Apply your patch to our glibc ebuilds, fix the corner cases, and go
back to glibc upstream with these data.
If the
On 31 May 2015 11:58, Mike Gilbert wrote:
On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 2:54 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
we've got a new QA check that warns whenever a package is built using a
32bit
filesystem interface. in practice, this applies to arm/mips/ppc/sh/x86
systems
(not including multilib -- for
On 31 May 2015 16:33, Alexis Ballier wrote:
On Sun, 31 May 2015 10:17:02 -0400 Mike Frysinger wrote:
On 31 May 2015 15:52, Alexis Ballier wrote:
On Sun, 31 May 2015 13:50:49 +0200 Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
On 31 May 2015 at 12:59, Alexis Ballier wrote:
nice, but can't we add the lfs
On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 2:54 PM, Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
we've got a new QA check that warns whenever a package is built using a 32bit
filesystem interface. in practice, this applies to arm/mips/ppc/sh/x86
systems
(not including multilib -- for now).
this topic has come up
On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 12:50 PM, Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 31 May 2015 11:58, Mike Gilbert wrote:
It might still be nice to adjust such packages for consistency, but it
might be harder to justify patches to upstream developers.
pkg-config already merged it and it's already
On Sat, 30 May 2015 14:54:42 -0400
Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
an example warning message:
* QA Notice: The following files were not built with LFS support:
* Please file a bug at http://bugs.gentoo.org/ and mark it as a
blocker of 471102.
* See that tracker bug
On 31 May 2015 at 12:59, Alexis Ballier aball...@gentoo.org wrote:
nice, but can't we add the lfs flags to our default toolchain flags or
even better patch glibc headers to always redefine these functions to
the 64bits variants?
No, because that can easily break ABI of programs that actually
150531 Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
Mike, thanks for doing this, it has been a pain in my shoe since 2008
https://blog.flameeyes.eu/2008/11/who-wants-to-support-largefile.
Do users with 64-bit systems have to pay attention to this ?
--
On 31 May 2015 at 14:33, Philip Webb purs...@ca.inter.net wrote:
Do users with 64-bit systems have to pay attention to this ?
Only as far as multilib is concerned. The 64-bit ABIs are (AFAIR) all LFS
with no opt-out. x86-64 is definitely LFS.
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
On 31 May 2015 12:59, Alexis Ballier wrote:
I don't understand why one should add append-lfs-flags to almost every
single package out there.
no one is suggesting that route. append-lfs-flags is a kludge (albeit an
effective one) in the face of no upstream support. if you look at the
On Sun, 31 May 2015 09:46:30 -0400
Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 31 May 2015 12:59, Alexis Ballier wrote:
I don't understand why one should add append-lfs-flags to almost
every single package out there.
no one is suggesting that route. append-lfs-flags is a kludge
(albeit
On 31 May 2015 15:52, Alexis Ballier wrote:
On Sun, 31 May 2015 13:50:49 +0200 Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
On 31 May 2015 at 12:59, Alexis Ballier wrote:
nice, but can't we add the lfs flags to our default toolchain flags
or even better patch glibc headers to always redefine these
On Sun, 31 May 2015 10:17:02 -0400
Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 31 May 2015 15:52, Alexis Ballier wrote:
On Sun, 31 May 2015 13:50:49 +0200 Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
On 31 May 2015 at 12:59, Alexis Ballier wrote:
nice, but can't we add the lfs flags to our default
we've got a new QA check that warns whenever a package is built using a 32bit
filesystem interface. in practice, this applies to arm/mips/ppc/sh/x86 systems
(not including multilib -- for now).
this topic has come up in Gentoo a few times over the years but we've never
really amassed the will
17 matches
Mail list logo
