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 4.43) id 1EAtUf-0003si-2e for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2005 18:08:57 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j81I50B8024565; Thu, 1 Sep 2005 18:05:00 GMT Received: from buggy.blubb.ch (range21-65.shlink.ch [217.148.7.65]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j81HuiHx006178 for ; Thu, 1 Sep 2005 17:56:44 GMT Received: from aqua ([192.168.10.5]) by buggy.blubb.ch with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1EAtJZ-0002IP-E7 for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2005 19:57:29 +0200 Message-ID: <43174174.1020701@gentoo.org> Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2005 19:59:16 +0200 From: Simon Stelling User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (X11/20050716) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en 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 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64 References: <20050901171028.GW18440@bmb24.uth.tmc.edu> <200509011923.58239@enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org> <43173BBD.3020704@gentoo.org> <43173D96.9030701@gentoo.org> <43173F2F.4080406@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <43173F2F.4080406@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 5acd99f1-fa23-4b71-9831-ebd027f0a97e X-Archives-Hash: 346cc727874e39bf7ac5f50843cafae3 Stephen P. Becker wrote: >> That's exactly why i don't like the idea of merging keywords: You >> loose the ~arch state. > > > We weren't talking about ~arch, we were talking about -arch. > I'm talking about ~arch. And it's a fact that ~arch would get lost, so the scenario i mentioned isn't covered. >> Also, you can't compare sparc32/sparc64 to x86/amd64: sparc64 is just >> a 64bit kernel with a 32bit userland. For users who want that, there >> is already a keyword: x86. > > > Wrong again. On mips, we have 64-bit kernels with *three* different > possible userlands, n64, n32, and o32, and we do just fine (although as > of right now, we haven't bothered to make any n64 stages since they > would run slower than n32 and o32 on all of our supported hardware). Where did you read the word 'mips' in my sentence above? Please, if this is just to make your boring evenings a bit more fun, try assing someone else. Thanks in advance, -- Simon Stelling Gentoo/AMD64 Operational Co-Lead blubb@gentoo.org -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list