From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 052C21387FD for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 06:32:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4457EE0A94; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 06:31:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2EA30E0A89 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 06:31:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.88.43] (unknown [96.241.16.8]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: tetromino) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3F06933FD65 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 06:31:55 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <1395901861.23327.35.camel@rook> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: crossdev and multilib interference From: Alexandre Rostovtsev To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 02:31:01 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4273026.i7QpdYDi0u@vapier> References: <53208139.2040509@gentoo.org> <4392318.HzopIDRGrh@vapier> <1395895307.23327.25.camel@rook> <4273026.i7QpdYDi0u@vapier> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-eeod0cF6k8W8GJUKpn00" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.10.4 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-Archives-Salt: 00ec9fac-167b-4d95-a9db-5d8303b2842b X-Archives-Hash: 897cdc90f5b90eac925b449cbb71510b --=-eeod0cF6k8W8GJUKpn00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, 2014-03-27 at 02:07 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > An amd64 multilib system *is* expected to build x86 > > binaries that would be hosted on itself. So i686-pc-linux-gnu-ar is > > expected to be not a part of any cross-compile toolchain, but a part of > > the native toolchain for the machine's secondary native ABI. Especially > > when i686-pc-linux-gnu-ar is in /usr/bin. >=20 > sure, and it works just fine when you use the correct toolchain. if the = user=20 > wants to build an ABI using their default toolchain, they can pass the ri= ght=20 > ABI flag for it. They can't pass the right ABI flag because only the core parts of the toolchain have the concept of an ABI flag. Sure, binutils and gcc respect "-m32". But what about pkgconfig (and its clones pkgconf and pkgconfig-openbsd)? What about the *-config tools for various libraries? Are you going to patch all of them to respect "-m32"? --=-eeod0cF6k8W8GJUKpn00 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAABAgAGBQJTM8WlAAoJEKRDAQ9PHUhgZMwQALp9QU5poCEM3tLJQa/5mTrt nGgpzfjd8Y9DZ818eSgpl+hmhbJvApWaFrmB0LFXR9LmrX5NUD0MLVmRk9uaJ3et 1qiDXAsbQPPD6/+PAE8UjPoXtKV/JR0f9Uf6X6ckYEozdlXPwi0RKzjTHURqvU5i AGqFpW3JFg+BTNOQNcJtTUBD7+uTxwnKp9E6Y/gYzIQ4ouEow3shOBak1an89CkL Y59QH/ZMvTkiyDW2xxe/C3f6LlCx3j7ar6f0+j68UOX/jiM23vp7+Z8SIoq/U9p4 doBElakGqdVmk7gEC6uIzP/u6Yr57YC1DfKc+vDenvi2inyMEdpFQQSrVojU4aoh bxmxeoVaqPdglioWogDSncg7t+OjkWxao1OXboo2NkdHIQPlU+izZQJBTCsQyKHt bu9433STUmCJJFOJ36HshW0TkfaVXBaraHSI98a+AW1+fwyilXHZyJLP+ulVtlWd opiC0uowIhE8QbOHJLUF3E3G8I2h48lM5e8efqz5TU1rRLE4lTOcrVC+qSfoIq2M oK/OcVfZ7aU/kGX5RK/Q6flCKqE+RrqxD8cvy0sCabybrFfXXXvoeIgI6oSLk4Y9 a02zljQk+qDFJSagI2o3CvS/WjDvMdxC1dnr4z5kUea17WPaTVlLHA2pPVqP57V/ HTHiLDs3vc/F1zYabzXw =mlgz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-eeod0cF6k8W8GJUKpn00--