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 B4D32138247 for ; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 06:35:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DBE89E0DEE; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 06:34:54 +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 D41FCE0DE8 for ; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 06:34:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.17] (pool-72-95-221-222.pitbpa.fios.verizon.net [72.95.221.222]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: zerochaos) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C863B33F7B1 for ; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 06:34:52 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <52CF949D.9010501@gentoo.org> Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 01:35:09 -0500 From: "Rick \"Zero_Chaos\" Farina" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 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] Re: [PATCH] To enable ssp default in Gcc the toolchain.eclass need some changes. References: <7554031.Sacz2dxc8i@laptop1.gw.ume.nu> <52CF1080.7010400@gentoo.org> <20140109172603.659c630f@caribou.gateway.pace.com> <201401100030.11205.dilfridge@gentoo.org> <20140109234108.GA8840@laptop.home> <20140109181200.6c1ca1e8@caribou.gateway.pace.com> In-Reply-To: <20140109181200.6c1ca1e8@caribou.gateway.pace.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 7593236f-7037-46df-abcd-edb5dbe276b6 X-Archives-Hash: 9c5ab5136d6d6ba9658392577c7266bd -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 01/09/2014 07:12 PM, Ryan Hill wrote: > On Thu, 9 Jan 2014 17:41:08 -0600 > William Hubbs wrote: > >> On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 12:30:04AM +0100, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: >>> Am Freitag, 10. Januar 2014, 00:26:03 schrieb Ryan Hill: >>>> >>>>> Please avoid "noblah" use flags. >>>>> >>>>> http://devmanual.gentoo.org/general-concepts/use-flags/ >>>>> >>>>> ssp flag that defaults to on is fine. >>>> >>>> This flag already exists and has always worked this way. >>> >>> "already exists and has always worked this way" is not really a good >>> argument. The rest of the tree sticks to guidelines, so why not here? >> >> Agreed again. Saying that something has always worked a certain way in >> the past is not justification for keeping it working that way, >> especially when there are preferred ways of doing the same thing that >> are different. > > Sure, I'm just pointing out that nothing is changing here. It sounded like > people were objecting to the addition of a new no* flag. I agree we should > change them once we can but that shouldn't block this patch. To be clear, I don't believe the QA team has any desire to block forward progress including this patch. I think everyone is chomping at the bit here to see some improvement on toolchain getting more up to date, and more with the QA policies that have been in place for years. I realize eapi 2 wasn't "that long ago" for some of you, but seriously, it was that long ago. More to the point, "this specific use flag" appears to have no purpose what-so-ever. If a user can do exactly the same with CFLAGS=-fno-stack-protector in make.conf, and it would be INSANE for a package to dep on gcc[nossp] then this is has got to be one of the most useless use flags in gentoo. Not saying I would block this patch, not saying it has to be this second, but I see this use flag as a small example of things in toolchain which could probably be cleaned up if fresh eyes were to see things. - -Zero > > >>>> We don't have USE defaults yet. >>> >>> Now if you had said "we can't use USE defaults yet since current ebuilds >>> are still at EAPI=0"... that would have been slightly more informative. :) >>> >>> (Yes I've seen that there is work going on, and I think that's good. Being >>> careful when modernizing makes sense here of course.) >> >> Right, I thought someone had updated toolchain.eclass to use a modern >> eapi, but I hadn't seen any more on that in some time. What's the >> latest? > > I did, but I can't start using new features until I bring all the ebuilds up to > a minimum EAPI. I'm going to start that this weekend. > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJSz5SdAAoJEKXdFCfdEflKq6wQAILiZN+BVZh+8XrEBsd4a0om aOk6Inj4zWMK2y5LvI+T29u1xMvko18lu4Vny4dv13w6OMXsE+nip+1nOhxNyJJG lCwiVWC603pzYw5am/q/XGg/GncjQFkx3FUSRlM8rJrRCQOyLinronojTtIG0GeV e4k4eHih+wx73agAHXdvLrXP0Ps11yYxY5+U1Rkjf9p4LwMCtJTAwidm0458YZSp 7+ZYJHiBQvLOpG+evcTx8r+7WqfROjIPpFsCXfuPvZiTbGalXK0hEp1rWZ3aDSsw wZyjo7cuucTGGDn58QRUIH5KLDZtPC0SVUZl9TVbT+rVbv/ugrboIH2rA33UxYr0 yUFj96gZCgVOHgmxsuOUhiR4R2yIDoFOFg7GEU1TL7ydnqPbxZ9FiYuwOTO5/6oN hqofWQgC9DgjVDB8V/9m4SON7xZbCsmUhlXM1BCCaDx4HlfsgyHn2QQThRwYM4Oq HHIA8dCBZytyhlZZ/E8qFlebkbBc7CmsU52htp/iI/eSVMBs7856ljzVbToyY95Q ClGHIF7zRRWW2tGNo9EurKt+U+esuJS6h2buRwRzWVW8nJYy3z11BnkzGp9vwTAc 1GO3kfruHDTtuvB7esSJAfCdz5WDQ/i7rdj5DkaSISrRL0sIQsgeGPDP2Z7+V4cq 0ItbZIIb/50u8JHNiucS =lrYq -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----