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 1FytBr-00039s-16 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 07 Jul 2006 16:28:27 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with SMTP id k67GQivR007261; Fri, 7 Jul 2006 16:26:44 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 k67GLcud004198 for ; Fri, 7 Jul 2006 16:21:38 GMT Received: from [192.168.1.100] (dsl081-148-077.chi1.dsl.speakeasy.net [64.81.148.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC31664781 for ; Fri, 7 Jul 2006 16:21:37 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <44AE89D9.1090905@gentoo.org> Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2006 11:20:41 -0500 From: Mike Doty User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516) 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] CPU subprofiles References: <200607061252.33028@enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org> <200607070139.10355@enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org> <44ADA441.9050309@gentoo.org> <200607070211.54587@enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org> <44ADAB5D.1060207@gentoo.org> <1152278855.31480.34.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> <44AE6360.8080504@gentoo.org> <20060707171417.3ec8dcb8@snowdrop.home> In-Reply-To: <20060707171417.3ec8dcb8@snowdrop.home> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: e4d0e920-5025-47e8-8148-1faefa61fbc0 X-Archives-Hash: 19080a977a28d6ee308dff04d944aff7 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Fri, 07 Jul 2006 08:36:32 -0500 Mike Doty > wrote: > | Chris Gianelloni wrote: > | [snip] > | > This means it is now 36 profiles to support, if we dropped support > | > on all profiles except for the new ones. Without having any sort of > | > multiple inheritance available, this is really unmanageable. > | > | This is exactly the same reason why amd64 won't move to a per CPU > | subprofile. it might be a good idea for ppc, but not for us. > > I believe all discussion on CPU subprofiles has started with "if we had > multiple profile support then". Would the situation be any different if > it were just a case of telling Portage to use > base/default-linux/x86/2008.1 + extras/x86/cpu/pentium4? > that would make it feasible, still not convinced it's the right way to go... -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list