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 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FyxcK-0000Cy-0d for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 07 Jul 2006 21:12:04 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with SMTP id k67LAZCq028431; Fri, 7 Jul 2006 21:10:35 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k67L7PLE012135 for ; Fri, 7 Jul 2006 21:07:26 GMT Received: from gentoo.org (cp237988-a.mill1.nb.home.nl [84.29.235.69]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6D4F6473A for ; Fri, 7 Jul 2006 21:07:24 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2006 23:09:40 +0200 From: Harald van =?utf-8?Q?D=C4=B3k?= To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: Gentoo vs GNU toolchain (was Re: [gentoo-dev] Replacing cpu-feature USE flags) Message-ID: <20060707210940.GA3573@gentoo.org> References: <200607061252.33028@enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org> <44AD6C8E.8060300@gentoo.org> <20060706201420.GA3845@gentoo.org> <200607061944.34690.vapier@gentoo.org> <20060707054615.GA3257@gentoo.org> <20060707160009.1c373aea@c1358217.kevquinn.com> <20060707165304.GA3255@gentoo.org> <1152294903.8423.20.camel@onyx> <20060707184036.GA3398@gentoo.org> <1152302271.10102.35.camel@onyx> 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: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1152302271.10102.35.camel@onyx> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by robin.gentoo.org id k67LAZEe028431 X-Archives-Salt: 5e653a32-1fec-4277-be49-427a6e86833a X-Archives-Hash: 73690ccc7493d1c8dd6d61dc4af96775 On Fri, Jul 07, 2006 at 03:57:51PM -0400, Ned Ludd wrote: > On Fri, 2006-07-07 at 20:40 +0200, Harald van D=C4=B3k wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 07, 2006 at 01:55:03PM -0400, Ned Ludd wrote: > > > Keep pushing this and the only thing you will end up with is the=20 > > > vanilla flag being removed all together.. > >=20 > > Is that a threat? If not, is there a reason behind this? >=20 > Yes.. When users or devs complain non stop when they=20 > don't understand something it leaves us with a few choices. > 1) put up with people not having a clue. > 2) remove the option so they can't bitch about it. >=20 > Option #1 is not fun as it pushes the hand on #2 Option 3: Enlighten me. I have explained why I feel the way I do, so if there's some big flaw in my understanding, please do correct it. > > > You want a pure 100%=20 > > > vanilla(POS) non working toolchain then go download it and=20 > > > compile it yourself. You will soon see why things exist the way=20 > > > they do.. > >=20 > > If you mean modifying the build system to actually work properly, the= n I > > have no problem with that. USE=3Dvanilla refers to runtime behaviour,= not > > the build system. (See use.desc.) Specifically, if patches are applie= d > > that make sure GCC compiles, and those patches make sure GCC compiles= to > > the same program intended by the GCC devs at that release, those patc= hes > > are appropriate, IMO. None of the GCC patches I have problems with ar= e > > of this nature. > >=20 > > If you mean vanilla GCC + build fixes is unusable, then I'd appreciat= e > > an explanation, because as far as I know, it can work just fine as a > > system compiler, and plenty of people, at some times myself included, > > use it as one. >=20 > You use the Gentoo modified one. Regardless of what USE=3D flags you ha= ve > enabled you are still getting Gentoo behaviors. Gentoo isn't the only system I use. I have used vanilla GCC + build fixes, and I have been able to get a working system with it. So I'm still waiting on your explanation of how it is unusable. > Think vanilla-sources are pure? They are not.=20 > They get patched as well with the minimal amount of patches required. Interesting, and I did not know that, but looking at kernel-2.eclass (which appears to be the only thing doing any modifying), the modifications are all build system fixes, and won't affect the generated kernel. --=20 gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list