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 1EAuLP-00038O-Ce for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2005 19:03:27 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j81Ixioh009229; Thu, 1 Sep 2005 18:59:44 GMT Received: from ctb-mesg8.saix.net (ctb-mesg8.saix.net [196.25.240.88]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j81IuSpM028440 for ; Thu, 1 Sep 2005 18:56:29 GMT Received: from gateway.lan (wblv-146-249-139.telkomadsl.co.za [165.146.249.139]) by ctb-mesg8.saix.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAD826362 for ; Thu, 1 Sep 2005 20:58:26 +0200 (SAST) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gateway.lan (Postfix) with ESMTP id B25A93A2482 for ; Thu, 1 Sep 2005 20:32:28 +0200 (SAST) Received: from gateway.lan ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (gateway.lan [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 04567-12 for ; Thu, 1 Sep 2005 20:32:18 +0200 (SAST) Received: from lycan.lan (lycan.lan [192.168.0.5]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gateway.lan (Postfix) with ESMTP id D13E73A241D for ; Thu, 1 Sep 2005 20:32:18 +0200 (SAST) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64 From: Martin Schlemmer To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <1125599804.15722.18.camel@cocagne.max-t.internal> References: <20050901171028.GW18440@bmb24.uth.tmc.edu> <200509011923.58239@enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org> <20050901184101.5ed8cadc@snowdrop.home> <200509011950.24494@enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org> <20050901190259.31d68edd@snowdrop.home> <1125599804.15722.18.camel@cocagne.max-t.internal> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-1TzWgGPzn5zaq93vK9/r" Organization: Gentoo Foundation Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2005 20:59:01 +0200 Message-Id: <1125601141.11345.16.camel@lycan.lan> 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 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.3.8 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at nosferatu.za.org X-Archives-Salt: 6f6e081d-b3b2-4fcb-8e1c-254260c1aa67 X-Archives-Hash: 9f251607934c89e279c2a3e20201ace7 --=-1TzWgGPzn5zaq93vK9/r Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, 2005-09-01 at 14:36 -0400, Olivier Crete wrote: > On Thu, 2005-01-09 at 19:02 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > On Thu, 1 Sep 2005 19:50:11 +0200 "Diego 'Flameeyes' Petten=C3=B2" > > wrote: > > | On Thursday 01 September 2005 19:41, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > | > Untrue. > > | > > | Can I have reasoning? > >=20 > > Take a look at how sparc and mips currently handle packages which will > > run on some CPU kinds or ABIs but not others. >=20 > Is it just me, it seems that only sparc/mips devs want that kind of > change and non none of the x86/amd64 devs...=20 >=20 No, Yes, and Yes. > I still dont see what practical advantage that would bring to x86/amd64 > users or developers?=20 >=20 Well, I guess the theory might be because then you only have one keyword and one base profile to manage - I think. --- =46rom a quick diff, it looks like they are handled via the ABI and PROFILE_ARCH stuff, but what your average sparc/mips dev do not realise, is that most x86 devs, and probably many amd64 devs have no idea what and how the ABI stuff is used. Mostly the ABI stuff was hacked by (and still is mostly if I'm not mistaken) by Jeremy, and they mostly just use ARCH or use to apply x86/amd64 patches. So your basic problem is that: 1) They have no idea how sparc/mips does it 2) They do not see any benefits 3) They get even more confused by the half assed answers they get. So to be frank, I propose that either the alt-arch devs start explaining above instead of half-assed answers and senseless ranting, or shut up. =46rom the amount of _usefull_ comments they have given, it does not look like its really an issue or priority for them besides having some fun. Thanks, --=20 Martin Schlemmer --=-1TzWgGPzn5zaq93vK9/r Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBDF091qburzKaJYLYRAlkFAKCAW6cjb6gOpbht+p8QLWTiW0jrwQCglqbK nn4X2TCzFqQ4Z0xS+K5/Gn4= =g8DX -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-1TzWgGPzn5zaq93vK9/r-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list