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 1EAVHP-0006Ey-Rm for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 31 Aug 2005 16:17:40 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j7VGEfT2010323; Wed, 31 Aug 2005 16:14:41 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j7VGCwPU010985 for ; Wed, 31 Aug 2005 16:12:59 GMT Received: from bmb24.med.uth.tmc.edu ([129.106.207.24] helo=localhost) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.43) id 1EAVF5-0000nN-PT for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Wed, 31 Aug 2005 16:15:15 +0000 Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 11:15:16 -0500 From: Grant Goodyear To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: [gentoo-core] crap use flags in the profiles Message-ID: <20050831161516.GJ18440@bmb24.uth.tmc.edu> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <20050829203259.GA13987@nightcrawler> <1125351816.1964.148.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> <20050829231247.104e9ff8@snowdrop.home> <1125404657.1964.167.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> <4314715E.5000809@gentoo.org> <4314BA18.8040009@egr.msu.edu> <1125436518.15621.54.camel@darksystem> <20050830214002.1ce72cc2@localhost> <4315AE3D.30700@gentoo.org> 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; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="2xzXx3ruJf7hsAzo" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4315AE3D.30700@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.10i X-Archives-Salt: aab02fd3-5a70-4d8e-930a-b3bb0c4b2bf6 X-Archives-Hash: 365de08f4833b0b2a2cab28668be82ee --2xzXx3ruJf7hsAzo Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Stephen P. Becker wrote: [Wed Aug 31 2005, 08:18:53AM CDT] > We don't "live with that problem on MIPS" because it doesn't exist. If= =20 > something doesn't work in one spot, we dont' stable keyword it...simple= =20 > as that. Also keep in mind that for some stuff, we don't have to test=20 > on both. For example, we have no supported little endian machines that= =20 > are capable of running X, therefore, we don't care about testing X=20 > there. See how it works? So, the basic suggestion is that x86 and amd64 would both use the same keyword, but that for cases such as valgrind pre-3.0, which didn't work at all on amd64, then those package are profile-masked, and there's=20 separate amd64 and x86 profiles (as there are now) to handle those distinctions? -g2boojum- --=20 Grant Goodyear=09 Gentoo Developer g2boojum@gentoo.org http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0 9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76 --2xzXx3ruJf7hsAzo Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDFdeUptxxUuD2W3YRAjxzAJ97YNZ6zbuSbUi0A6bpEsrSXDxf4QCfRopK 2o7AM4lyWM8AWdSdYWJQhic= =74i9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --2xzXx3ruJf7hsAzo-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list