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 2575F138247 for ; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 10:57:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 64C4CE0AC1; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 10:57:35 +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 6DCF7E0AB6 for ; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 10:57:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.178.22] (p4FCFCC91.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [79.207.204.145]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: tommy) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 490E433EFDC for ; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 10:57:33 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <52874F93.8030501@gentoo.org> Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2013 11:57:23 +0100 From: Thomas Sachau User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/24.0 SeaMonkey/2.21 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] Please consider removing use.stable.mask and package.use.stable.mask References: <20131113151012.04145837@gentoo.org> <5283948F.1000409@gentoo.org> <52841023.9010208@gentoo.org> <20131114061328.09136f6f@gentoo.org> <20131115233934.7142bb04@gentoo.org> <1384590157.1308.13.camel@belkin5> In-Reply-To: <1384590157.1308.13.camel@belkin5> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2 OpenPGP: id=211CA2D4 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="S5efcs8IBMt8PWJcxvE6DCDUHdWBDc0xe" X-Archives-Salt: ab3d3193-0e34-4bd9-8722-ceabeafef0a3 X-Archives-Hash: cd5931fb0df92fe468328b79b5593a7d This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --S5efcs8IBMt8PWJcxvE6DCDUHdWBDc0xe Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Pacho Ramos schrieb: > El vie, 15-11-2013 a las 23:39 +0100, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny escribi=C3= =B3: >> Dnia 2013-11-15, o godz. 14:53:00 >> Ben de Groot napisa=C5=82(a): >> >>> As I see it now, with respect to multilib, we have three competing >>> solutions, but not a clear direction which way we want to go as a >>> distro: >>> >>> 1: emul-* packages >=20 > This is the current option but has important drawbacks: > - Each emul set contains a ton of packages, then, when a security issue= > arises in one of them, we need to release a new emul-linux-x86-... > - It's built from stable tree, it can then cause inconsistencies when > people run native lib from testing (I remember pulseaudio case) > - If we would like to really follow stabilized packages, we would nearl= y > need to generate a new set every week because likely some of the > contained packages will be stabilized on x86 so often. > - As they are a big set of packages, people need to install a lot of > stuff they don't really need >=20 > In summary -> they are completely unflexible, with the problems it caus= e >=20 >>> 2: multilib-portage >=20 > I think this has been discussed multiple times, if I don't misremember,= > PMS team is not willing to accept it until the specification is done...= > and we are waiting for that for years probably because it includes a lo= t > of changes (well, Tommy will know much more about this) Ever tried to write a formal spec in a foreing language? Creating multilib-portage was easier then this request.... Anyway, the new multilib eclasses had no entrance barrier, so have been added and effectively everyone is forced to use them. Since i dont expect anyone to vote for a different solution in the future, which would force all multilib related parts to be rewritten, i stopped my work on the spec part. If anyone wants to continue that road, i can hand over any pieces i already have. Instead i will simply prepare/maintain multilib-portage as a portage-only package manager based multilib solution, which requires no changes to ebuilds. This also keeps a choice for users, who cant or dont want to convert all needed ebuilds to the new multilib eclasses. --=20 Thomas Sachau Gentoo Linux Developer --S5efcs8IBMt8PWJcxvE6DCDUHdWBDc0xe Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SeaMonkey - http://www.enigmail.net/ iJwEAQECAAYFAlKHT5kACgkQG7kqcTWJkGf+xwP8Dojk4Yk5xYQXq89qr2dS9ZlG Gs6GYkTOgAnBxmakq6Ab/C99qwbmJr8iCv/DTefjHgFky75uqKv+htwLv6A67jwu Exxoq+hDhdFnfGKqE0hceKb4qy8eCjzkfdvNde4MpN76heVcs+mOljWEevyvhImX oSIISAqsipTGq9tf42E= =pY6I -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --S5efcs8IBMt8PWJcxvE6DCDUHdWBDc0xe--