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 1EAPn4-0004Ra-Tr for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 31 Aug 2005 10:25:59 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j7VAMRPm010522; Wed, 31 Aug 2005 10:22:27 GMT Received: from callisto.cs.kun.nl (callisto.cs.kun.nl [131.174.33.75]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j7VAIs1Y008111 for ; Wed, 31 Aug 2005 10:18:55 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by callisto.cs.kun.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21D482E8029 for ; Wed, 31 Aug 2005 12:19:18 +0200 (CEST) From: Paul de Vrieze To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-core] crap use flags in the profiles Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 12:19:16 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.2 References: <20050825000442.GC1701@nightcrawler> <1125434724.3539.42.camel@cocagne.max-t.internal> <20050830223657.75a4c2b8@localhost> In-Reply-To: <20050830223657.75a4c2b8@localhost> X-Face: #Lb+'V@sGJ;ptgo5}V"W+5OCoo{LZv;bh,s,`WKLi/J)ed1_$0;6X<=?utf-8?q?700LVV/=3BLqPhiDP=5E=0A=09=27f=5Dfnv?=@%6M8\'HR1t=aFx;ePfp{ZQoBe+e)JOQ8T5*(_;mHY+cltLGq<;@$Y,=?utf-8?q?O=5C=24=0A=09Tm=23G6M?=,g![Q62J{na*S9d;R[^8pc%u\aiLqU@`kJtYl"^6pxdW 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: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1331643.Gt7eUZcZpj"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200508311219.16997.pauldv@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 80f0797d-ebb4-4ef3-a5cf-46f4d7e27c03 X-Archives-Hash: f672cb9d3e46d7d16e349acd86262011 --nextPart1331643.Gt7eUZcZpj Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Tuesday 30 August 2005 23:36, Stephen Bennett wrote: > On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 16:45:24 -0400 > > Olivier Crete wrote: > > You are comparing apples and oranges.. Most of the herd devs only > > have x86 and are not able to test amd64. That's the main difference. > > Most of the mips devs only have 64-bit big endian SGI hardware, and > aren't able to test on little-endian systems. Endianness issues are at > least as big a problem as 64-bit issues when porting software. This architecture however has the advantage that most upstream software is= =20 written for 32 bit little endian (read x86) systems. Most times using=20 64bit big endian weeds out the cases where upstream developers made=20 incorrect assumptions on the architecture. As such, when it works on such=20 a system it's likely to work on variations too that are 32bit or little=20 endian. Paul =2D-=20 Paul de Vrieze Gentoo Developer Mail: pauldv@gentoo.org Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net --nextPart1331643.Gt7eUZcZpj Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBDFYQkbKx5DBjWFdsRAnzaAJ0e7s35KEnhyze8WosmMorks1f6jgCffqtT sWdxebm71gcmwE/vb269PF0= =DcyA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1331643.Gt7eUZcZpj-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list