public inbox for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alexis Ballier <aballier@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in media-libs/freetype: freetype-2.4.11-r1.ebuild ChangeLog
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 19:27:22 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130227192722.65a55ac5@portable> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <512E4D0E.9070700@gentoo.org>

On Wed, 27 Feb 2013 19:14:38 +0100
hasufell <hasufell@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On 02/27/2013 06:58 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> > 
> >> The other thing is:
> >> We still have the conflict with eclass-solution vs PM-solution
> >> (multilib-portage) and I propose not to convert ANYTHING else until
> >> that conflict is solved, even if it means a council vote (that's
> >> what I actually think makes sense here).
> >> I understand both sides and somehow find it appealing to have a
> >> quicker solution, but since this could damage years of work on a
> >> portage fork I think we should slow down here.
> > 
> > except there _has_ been a discussion:
> > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/80330
> > 
> > where, at least for me, it appeared that the eclass solution was the
> > right way and portage-multilib had its defects that could not be
> > solved without such an eclass solution.
> 
> I don't even know multilib-portage (think is this way around) that
> detailed myself, but Tommy[D] claims that some of those problems will
> be solved in EAPI=6 and that he is willing to work on the spec.

What are the problems exactly? I'm likely misinformed, but to me it
seemed there is nothing EAPI-related there. What kind of spec (read:
pms diff) do we need?

> The reason I bring this up again is that there was a strong argument
> yesterday in #gentoo-dev, so it seems the situation is NOT clear.

What are these arguments ? The IRC conspiracy is hard to follow :)

> > Long story short: portage-multilib does not handle deps needing
> > multilib and deps not needing them. Only packages maintainers know
> > that, you cannot guess it at the PM level. Doing unpack twice, while
> > bearable, is also suboptimal. portage-multilib already disables its
> > multilib support for multilib-enabled packages, thus there is not
> > even a conflict there.
> > 
> 
> It still does not make sense to work in two different directions,
> imo. I was supporting the eclass idea myself by proposing
> autotools-multilib-minimal.eclass, but I think this should be voted
> on, so we don't duplicate work.

Again, without a summary of pros and cons and an old discussion that
died leaving the eclass solution as a winner, it is a bit harsh to ask
for a vote.

I like to see multilib-portage as the temporary, available today,
solution and eclass based stuff as the long term and clean solution.

Alexis.


  reply	other threads:[~2013-02-27 18:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20130225222029.D84D12171D@flycatcher.gentoo.org>
2013-02-27 17:10 ` [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in media-libs/freetype: freetype-2.4.11-r1.ebuild ChangeLog hasufell
2013-02-27 17:58   ` Alexis Ballier
2013-02-27 18:14     ` hasufell
2013-02-27 18:27       ` Alexis Ballier [this message]
2013-02-27 19:05         ` hasufell
2013-02-27 19:09           ` Ciaran McCreesh
2013-03-02 11:08           ` Alexis Ballier
2013-03-02 15:01             ` hasufell
2013-02-27 20:25         ` Pacho Ramos
2013-02-27 21:12           ` Thomas Sachau
2013-03-02 10:55             ` Alexis Ballier
2013-02-27 20:30     ` Pacho Ramos
2013-02-27 21:08     ` Thomas Sachau
2013-02-27 21:18       ` Michał Górny
2013-03-02 10:53       ` Alexis Ballier
2013-02-27 18:15   ` Diego Elio Pettenò
2013-02-27 20:20   ` Pacho Ramos
2013-02-27 20:23     ` Ciaran McCreesh

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20130227192722.65a55ac5@portable \
    --to=aballier@gentoo.org \
    --cc=gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox