On 21-10-2008 16:09:12 +0200, Tiziano Müller wrote:
> > As "Gentoo Solaris" would not be the same as "Gentoo Prefix on Solaris",
> > it should not share the *-solaris keywords used for Prefix via the same
> > KEYWORDS-setting.
> what about a new generic schema like: CPU-OS[-prefix] with the possibi
Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2008-10-09 at 20:11 +0200, Fabian Groffen wrote:
>
>> sparc-solaris
>> sparc64-solaris
>> x64-solaris
>> x86-solaris
>
>> Perhaps using KEYWORDS for Prefix keywords is not the best thing to do,
>> and should we use something like PREFIX_KEYWORDS?
>
> Ma
On Mon, 2008-10-13 at 19:59 +0200, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 13-10-2008 15:27:10 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 06:16:01 +0100
> > Steve Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Unless someone can say what using PROPERTIES=prefix would break, I'd
> > > go with that. It's a /cl
On 13-10-2008 15:27:10 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 06:16:01 +0100
> Steve Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Unless someone can say what using PROPERTIES=prefix would break, I'd
> > go with that. It's a /classic/ usage of that variable, as it's simply
> > a boolean; PROPERT
On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 06:16:01 +0100
Steve Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Unless someone can say what using PROPERTIES=prefix would break, I'd
> go with that. It's a /classic/ usage of that variable, as it's simply
> a boolean; PROPERTIES is well-defined and I'm hoping all the manglers
> support i
Jeremy Olexa wrote:
> Fabian Groffen wrote:
>
>> Most notably, in Prefix all keywords are full GLEP53 style, which
>> results in e.g. amd64-linux. We did this on purpose, because in Prefix
>> we don't necessarily are on Gentoo Linux. We also chose to expand fbsd,
>> nbsd and obsd to their long
On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 17:56:37 +0200
Marius Mauch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 14:48:19 +0200
> Fabian Groffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Whatever. Some of you seem to have some quite agressive dislikement
> > to it. In the end it's just a name/tag. I guess I could live
On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 14:48:19 +0200
Fabian Groffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Whatever. Some of you seem to have some quite agressive dislikement
> to it. In the end it's just a name/tag. I guess I could live with
> anything, including c3p0.
Well, while I dislike x64 I'm more concerned about
On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 09:15:16 +0200
Fabian Groffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > No, x64 is the marketing name Microsoft made up for x86_64 (aka
> > amd64, ia32e and Intel 64), as "Windows for x86_64" doesn't sound
> > that sexy, and was later adopted by Sun and others.
> > ia64/Itanium doesn't h
On 10-10-2008 14:40:13 +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> Fabian Groffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > - x64 is what the vendors (Apple, Sun) advertise themselves
>
> Err I'm sure I haven't seen any x64 in the documentation or
> advertisement of my MacBook Pro, are you sure _Apple_ use
Fabian Groffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> - x64 is what the vendors (Apple, Sun) advertise themselves
Err I'm sure I haven't seen any x64 in the documentation or
advertisement of my MacBook Pro, are you sure _Apple_ uses that totally
bogus name?
Anyway, em64t might be better, but then again y
On 10-10-2008 04:21:23 +0200, Marius Mauch wrote:
> > >> amd64-linux
> > >> x64-openbsd
> > >> x64-solaris
> > >
> > > Is there a special reason why you're using "x64" instead of "amd64"
> > > in those cases? (IMO x64 is the most stupid name for the x86_64
> > > architecture)
> >
> > AFAIK, th
On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 00:16:10 + (UTC)
Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Marius Mauch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted
> [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Fri,
> 10 Oct 2008 00:05:00 +0200:
>
> > On Thu, 9 Oct 2008 20:11:01 +0200
> > Fabian Groffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>amd6
Marius Mauch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Fri, 10
Oct 2008 00:05:00 +0200:
> On Thu, 9 Oct 2008 20:11:01 +0200
> Fabian Groffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> amd64-linux
>> x64-openbsd
>> x64-solaris
>
> Is there a special reason why you're
14 matches
Mail list logo
