From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1PjGEy-0002aW-44 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 29 Jan 2011 19:13:44 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6F21EE09CD; Sat, 29 Jan 2011 19:13:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 344DDE08A6 for ; Sat, 29 Jan 2011 19:13:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.201] (23.151.222.87.dynamic.jazztel.es [87.222.151.23]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: pacho) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 07E821B4003 for ; Sat, 29 Jan 2011 19:13:05 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] MULTI_ABI support addition to main tree portage From: Pacho Ramos To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <4D4462CE.5060600@gentoo.org> References: <4CF69AAA.4030506@gentoo.org> <1296320590.14673.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20110129181034.GP1713@ohnopublishing.net> <1296325850.14673.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4D4462CE.5060600@gentoo.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-1gn7MZgRKRomCDAWDPiS" Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2011 20:13:00 +0100 Message-ID: <1296328380.14673.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.1 X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: f2b1b1b6496505d64814ae357857ced5 --=-1gn7MZgRKRomCDAWDPiS Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable El s=C3=A1b, 29-01-2011 a las 19:56 +0100, Thomas Sachau escribi=C3=B3: > Am 29.01.2011 19:30, schrieb Pacho Ramos: > > El s=C3=A1b, 29-01-2011 a las 13:10 -0500, Nathan Phillip Brink escribi= =C3=B3: > >> On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 06:03:10PM +0100, Pacho Ramos wrote: > >>> > >>> Hello > >>> > >>> I would like to know what is "blocking" this from landing main tree i= n > >>> the "near" future, as I reviewed: > >>> > >>> http://www.mail-archive.com/gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org/msg41737.html > >>> > >>> and looks like there wasn't major problems (at least commented in thi= s > >>> thread) > >> > >> There are still a number of known build failures, tracked in > >> https://bugs.gentoo.org/alias/portage-multilib . There are probably > >> many more portage-multilib-related build failures which haven't been > >> encountered yet nor reported. Also, even these reported bugs are not > >> necessarily fixed first because they only affect us the minority ;-). > >=20 > > OK, thanks. Maybe bug 306835 should block bug 145737 instead of > > depending on it, not? >=20 > I think, they are mostly dublicates, bug 145737 was the original multilib= -portage idea of kanaka, > but he discontinued it. The version of today (bug 306835) does partly bas= e on his work and partly on > the work with the native-multilib eclass from some Gentoo users with some= additional changes from me. >=20 > >=20 > >> > >> Most everything is easy to debug and as simple as replacing calls to > >> $(LD) in poorly-written Makefileswith with calls to $(CC), fixing > >> packages which ignore CFLAGS (where we store our -m32) or LDFLAGS > >> (where we now also store -m32 since one's not allowed to require > >> buildsystems to call $(CC) with $(CFLAGS) when objects are being > >> linked into an executable or library). > >> > >> However, packages which use qmake or cmake macros installed by KDE are > >> more difficult to debug and there are other funny issues such as > >> CFLAGS being stored by a library's buildsystem and stored into > >> /usr/share instead of an ABI-dependent directory, breaking packages > >> which use that library... ;-) > >> > >> Also, there are still some decisions/changes to portage-multilib which > >> might be made The most recent idea discussed was: should ${ARCH} > >> useflags (like SRC_URI=3D"x86? ( http://host/my-binari-x86.tar.bz2 )") > >> be replaced with ${ABI} useflags or should we rewrite a bunch of > >> ebuilds in the tree to be multilib-aware? For example: > >> > >> Say we have > >> ABI=3Dx86 > >> ARCH=3Damd64 > >> > >> Does ``use x86'' return true or do we need to use ``use multilib_abi_x= 86''? > >> Do detect the true arch, do we need ``use arch_amd64'' or does ``use a= md64'' still return true? > >> > >=20 > > Where do you discuss things like this? IRC channel? Mailing-list? > > Thanks :-) >=20 > Most communication is done in #gentoo-multilib-overlay on freenode IRC. I= have also created a mail > alias (multilib@g.o), but it is only used for some bugzilla assignments a= t the moment. >=20 >=20 OK, thanks a lot --=-1gn7MZgRKRomCDAWDPiS Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAk1EZrwACgkQCaWpQKGI+9TKRQCeO3189FMiVXb/aIXBnmXoLRBK eswAn3q1Y5BVYjp1PlqRRcLo4o+Vx0Bh =wR6R -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-1gn7MZgRKRomCDAWDPiS--