From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KjyzX-0000cX-F2 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 28 Sep 2008 16:19:28 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4D3B8E0756; Sun, 28 Sep 2008 16:19:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27DA4E0756 for ; Sun, 28 Sep 2008 16:19:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gentoo.org (c-71-193-142-160.hsd1.or.comcast.net [71.193.142.160]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F78E643D0 for ; Sun, 28 Sep 2008 16:19:23 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2008 09:19:21 -0700 From: Donnie Berkholz To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Preventing $ARCH flags in USE Message-ID: <20080928161921.GB20797@comet> References: <48CEBB5B.8020507@gentoo.org> <48D12E25.8000003@gentoo.org> 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 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="EuxKj2iCbKjpUGkD" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <48D12E25.8000003@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-Archives-Salt: d07824ac-b0fa-43c5-a708-dc0d3278f676 X-Archives-Hash: 002f429acada31e8ef9cd6966e01134b --EuxKj2iCbKjpUGkD Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 09:19 Wed 17 Sep , Zac Medico wrote: > I suggest that we unmask the appropriate ARCH flags in > profiles/arch/*/use.mask, add ../base to profiles/arch/*/parent, and > create profiles/arch/base/use.mask to mask all of the existing ARCH > flags. This will serve to mask all but the appropriate ARCH flags > for all of the 2008.0 profiles. Does this seem reasonable? Yes, and don't the arch profiles already have base as a parent? --=20 Thanks, Donnie Donnie Berkholz Developer, Gentoo Linux Blog: http://dberkholz.wordpress.com --EuxKj2iCbKjpUGkD Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAkjfrokACgkQXVaO67S1rtvf5gCgqrdkURYK/irsciSyvg0SEeyf yK0AnRNEtQThGquhHMzf0wASVbUjv00b =r4Sq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --EuxKj2iCbKjpUGkD--