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 F30B0198005 for ; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 13:03:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 58431E097B; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 13:03:40 +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 7137EE096D for ; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 13:03:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.184.110.238] (212-226-57-213-nat.elisa-mobile.fi [212.226.57.213]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: ssuominen) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B94F633DC94 for ; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 13:03:37 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <512E03BF.6020305@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 15:01:51 +0200 From: Samuli Suominen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130224 Thunderbird/17.0.3 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] New eclass: autotools-multilib-minimal References: <51296027.705@gentoo.org> <51299593.1010902@gentoo.org> <20130224110620.662a9079@pomiocik.lan> <5129E750.1020000@flameeyes.eu> <512A210F.50703@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <512A210F.50703@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archives-Salt: af07f8b1-9f27-4154-995d-ea3361e00f9f X-Archives-Hash: 11a17632d2f1895f1fb345f67e53efbf On 24/02/13 16:17, hasufell wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 02/24/2013 11:11 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: >> On 24/02/2013 11:06, Michał Górny wrote: >>> Then don't put 'autotools' in the name. >> >> +1 >> > > That would be multilib-minimal.eclass then? Sounds good to me. > ABCD also suggested something else: > autotools-multilib.eclass -> autotools-utils-multilib.eclass This makes sense too, autotools-multilib.eclass is misleading as it embeds the "unrelated" autotools-utils.eclass So it seems currently that some are against this eclass, some are against the whole idea and favour multilib-portage, some are against using autotools-utils.eclass for this, ... Some people are already committing the eclass version changes/fixes to tree, some are filing bug reports about bugs caused by it, ... It would be nice if people agreed but I guess that is not happening, so i'll be pushing this eclass to tree under name 'multilib-minimal.eclass' if I don't hear compelling arguments for not doing so, or in case you push it before me - Samuli