From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 339FE1387FD for ; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 06:36:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 16BDFE0A7F; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 06:36:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0135DE0888 for ; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 06:36:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vapier.localnet (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37E1B33FD8C for ; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 06:36:05 +0000 (UTC) From: Mike Frysinger To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: crossdev and multilib interference Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 02:36:11 -0400 Message-ID: <31757180.gTPZtqku3h@vapier> Organization: wh0rd.org User-Agent: KMail/4.12.3 (Linux/3.13.0; KDE/4.12.3; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20140327084108.GA3654@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk> References: <53208139.2040509@gentoo.org> <1660834.UE1ARX9orZ@vapier> <20140327084108.GA3654@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk> 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; boundary="nextPart2184471.OgkEgBZ7Q2"; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: 6685a1c7-e4b6-4a9f-a742-f6ff75ea31d5 X-Archives-Hash: fec713b6ecbcc20e746596822c5997d9 --nextPart2184471.OgkEgBZ7Q2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" On Thu 27 Mar 2014 08:41:08 Steven J. Long wrote: > Mike Frysinger wrote: > > Steven J. Long wrote: > > > Mike Frysinger wrote: > > > > if they're in $PATH, then the exact location is irrelevant. > > > > they need not be in /usr/bin to cause a problem. > > > > if they're not in $PATH, then you're breaking the cross-compile= rs > > > > and that is unacceptable. > > >=20 > > > Cross-compilation should be supported via cross-emerge, and perha= ps a > > > small > > > script the cross-compiler sources to setup the env (ie prefix to = PATH in > > > this case) for using CHOST-* tools, like x86-pc-linux-gnu-gcc tar= getting > > > a straight x86 platform, instead of the normal multilib setup. Th= e > > > latter being used by the former (I'd have thought it was already = done.) > > >=20 > > > The cross tools should NOT pollute the default PATH, simply becau= se the > > > user happened to run crossdev at some point. > >=20 > > that's bs. people install crossdev to get a cross-compile environm= ent, > > not to get something that only works through `emerge`. attempting = to > > restrict it so it only works through `emerge` is unacceptable and i= t has > > never been that way. >=20 > That's why I suggested a small sh script to source, to setup that > environment. Personally, I do an awful lot more than that just to bui= ld a > native chroot, let alone cross-compile. And I really don't see the ha= rdship > for these brave "cross-compilers" of yours in sourcing a small setup > script, which can be added to ~/.bashrc or even the system-wide one, = for > anyone who really wants it to apply whenever they login. Is this some= how > beyond our most advanced userbase? >=20 > People may install crossdev to get a cross-compile environment, but i= t's a > broken design if it's not contained. And BS about how you think it sh= ould > ALWAYS go for everybody, only leads to borked "solutions" elsewhere l= ike > telling the people on an amd64 install that they have to run some god= =2Dawful > "new" %multilib thing to compile for their secondary ABI. That's just= as > counter-intuitive, when you could just fix your borkage and have a cl= ean > setup for everyone. your conclusions are invalid as you're basing them on the assumption th= at the=20 current multilib system is working correctly and cleanly. it is provab= ly not. sticking your head in the sand and blaming crossdev for errors in the m= ultilib=20 logic is asinine. =2Dmike --nextPart2184471.OgkEgBZ7Q2 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAABAgAGBQJTNRhbAAoJEEFjO5/oN/WB4pEQAMdCfkzAsF/N/J4+ydMaBqX6 RkfIBLP76jJdYjpOfo+L+fHRuzOO9hnE2y/Y97JrxEe1hHgHtQ8kmt/9Jt9qeNRm byJvcxurw4iGjaD2l5t8dvPyRitSoKSrUFZ+PWxuhsmF14ClFBpCjrUmXzwokIEx JPxsW/w3YrbAkvZoPygvBvmscIv9qcKW3K9a0Nisgr5WRQe7l9I19EUx7EDfwLAM /AtYBsgaSAvki1oL6nD2Iv2L2m7g5ztaC2pOor2q96uZ/z3iHqSalHXw+1cIky32 ndB7DbrnLrEulXME+PkH8jnrt8SYhKJp40OnwsU0VyMsoUmP0gRoB6oE1zknQUTf 8CB7HXMjLTVAGUTbe5UfHobDZjXYz7z7aukSWiqWa2EackAscUx3Z0ydtT0/LYCB M8xYhD/vJs8s/X3T2RADlKrVoAe5jzqoqxeaYCOsHdyKYRgqdkcmQZP0K0/pxxSS BLSRkLNcbugH6ppzsvSW8Gt5ojq9cWz2lCi42TNT68UOTWy67ZfGehzE//cMlZE6 Pxe02USTnndnGYhHoidT2Pbc+WMHAMwvIrZveG642hHu0aMI1Z0RKUKKdivYQXg2 CpIiSNdDQVv4P+NSczsNMsPzFPmrXm5EmeqcWZnjLNvmMq0udXr3MoiyS9I3o53v S951Gi3nI4Eev9PpOmyW =cqLj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart2184471.OgkEgBZ7Q2--