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 08FC51385AC for ; Sun, 20 Jan 2013 23:59:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0DCDDE0656; Sun, 20 Jan 2013 23:59:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1FC4CE064E for ; Sun, 20 Jan 2013 23:59:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.173.18.141] (unknown [89.204.138.141]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: chithanh) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DD55833D3DC for ; Sun, 20 Jan 2013 23:59:41 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <50FC84E7.7000308@gentoo.org> Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 00:59:35 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?B?Q2jDrS1UaGFuaCBDaHJpc3RvcGhlciBOZ3V54buFbg==?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Firefox/17.0 SeaMonkey/2.14 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 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Getting proper USE_EXPAND variable(s) for multilib References: <20130120201131.5afcbf48@pomiocik.lan> <50FC7731.2090708@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <50FC7731.2090708@gentoo.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archives-Salt: 62384ba3-8fb2-4366-b123-360d55a3ea66 X-Archives-Hash: be42dbc6afa94aa3ec87a8437dc44a44 Thomas Sachau schrieb: > So you want to re-implement multilib-portage in an eclass without the additional benefits a package-manager level implementation has? Once the package-manager level implementation becomes available in g-x86 then we can switch to it. If something in the proposed changes makes the PM implementation harder or causes additional work, please point this out so it can be addressed. Personally I wouldn't mind waiting until the next council meeting and keep all changes in the x11 overlay until then. Best regards, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn