From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EAAee-00089U-5j for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 30 Aug 2005 18:16:16 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j7UICrW5029519; Tue, 30 Aug 2005 18:12:53 GMT Received: from mail-relay-4.tiscali.it (mail-relay-4.tiscali.it [213.205.33.44]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j7UI9adh015958 for ; Tue, 30 Aug 2005 18:09:36 GMT Received: from default (84.222.82.234) by mail-relay-4.tiscali.it (7.2.063) id 431334F30001A4A1 for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 30 Aug 2005 20:11:45 +0200 Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 20:15:01 +0200 X-Mailer: InScribe Message-ID: <05F65.11737PJ4@gentoo.org> References: <4314715E.5000809@gentoo.org> To: From: "Kevin F. Quinn" Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-core] crap use flags in the profiles Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 8e73356a-7df0-43ec-aaef-069b7ac561af X-Archives-Hash: c3e3d878a1d25bc31f5de97b16de7e56 On 30/8/2005 10:46:54, Stephen P. Becker (geoman@gentoo.org) wrote: > Is this also a good time to note that the amd64 and x86 could *easily* > be covered under the same keyword? The big reason I think, is that few x86 people have a clue about amd64. Contrast this with the mips team; I'd guess most mips devs understand the variations well enough. Thus it makes sense that amd64 should be able to keyword independently of x86. Kev. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list