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 1FyzT9-0007DA-Bl for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 07 Jul 2006 23:10:43 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with SMTP id k67N7lfS023367; Fri, 7 Jul 2006 23:07:47 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 k67N2V7t016614 for ; Fri, 7 Jul 2006 23:02:31 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 9B6BC6415B for ; Fri, 7 Jul 2006 23:02:28 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sat, 8 Jul 2006 01:04:45 +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: <20060707230445.GA3800@gentoo.org> References: <200607061252.33028@enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org> <200607071712.21536.vapier@gentoo.org> <20060707215313.GA3713@gentoo.org> <200607071813.28005.vapier@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: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200607071813.28005.vapier@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Archives-Salt: 68045ec4-2fa9-4bd4-af62-7a3b63fc42f1 X-Archives-Hash: e49277839ff7c538b9a377638931271b On Fri, Jul 07, 2006 at 06:13:27PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > ignored *what* then ? you requested USE=vanilla control ssp, i said no and > i'll add support for USE=nossp ... you requested USE/stub control, i said no, > go delete the stubs USE=nossp existed before USE=vanilla did. To be sure I'm remembering right, I checked `cvs log toolchain.eclass`. In order, probably skipping a few steps: 1- No SSP 2- Choice between SSP [USE=-nossp] and stub patches [USE=nossp]. USE=vanilla didn't exist. 3- Choice between SSP [USE="-nossp -vanilla"], stub patches [USE="nossp -vanilla"], and nothing [USE="vanilla"] 4- Choice between SSP [USE=-nossp] and stub patches [USE=nossp] USE=vanilla exists but has no effect on SSP. It was during 2 that I asked for a way to disable stub patches for myself (and not as part of the official ebuild), and you said to delete them. That was good enough for me during 2. We are now in 4. > i dont see what else you're referring to ... be specific, vague claims only > lead to wasting of both our times I hope this is specific enough: toolchain.eclass revision 1.234 (separating ssp/... from vanilla) log message: "ssp/pie/htb have their own USE flags sep from vanilla, so people can utilize those" when in fact the old USE=vanilla behaviour is unavailable now. You have never (as far as I know) answered whether it was intended to keep the old behaviour as an option, and if it wasn't, why the log message is what it is. > all bets are off now then ... with Halcy0n leaving us, that leaves me as the > only person maintaining the toolchain (there are few devs who contribute > fixes for their ports and it helps out a ton, but that doesnt really count as > being fully responsible for the toolchain packages). I'll keep that in mind, I wasn't aware that the other toolchain guys handle specific parts of the toolchain packages only. Even if I disagree with some specific decisions, nice job overall, then. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list