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 4F31C1387FD for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 07:03:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BCEBDE0A90; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 07:03:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D1116E0A69 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 07:03:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.181.179.176] (85-76-66-170-nat.elisa-mobile.fi [85.76.66.170]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: ssuominen) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6090F33FD53 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 07:03:36 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <5333CC1A.5070004@gentoo.org> Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 08:58:34 +0200 From: Samuli Suominen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 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: crossdev and multilib interference References: <53208139.2040509@gentoo.org> <4273026.i7QpdYDi0u@vapier> <1395901861.23327.35.camel@rook> <1444456.ldicfnyzpn@vapier> In-Reply-To: <1444456.ldicfnyzpn@vapier> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 5d3e3263-5298-418f-b298-a1bbe24c5ea4 X-Archives-Hash: 27d4265ec12afdb97da6c73a612b3a8f On 27/03/14 08:41, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Thu 27 Mar 2014 02:31:01 Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote: >> On Thu, 2014-03-27 at 02:07 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: >>>> An amd64 multilib system *is* expected to build x86 >>>> binaries that would be hosted on itself. So i686-pc-linux-gnu-ar is >>>> expected to be not a part of any cross-compile toolchain, but a part of >>>> the native toolchain for the machine's secondary native ABI. Especially >>>> when i686-pc-linux-gnu-ar is in /usr/bin. >>> sure, and it works just fine when you use the correct toolchain. if the >>> user wants to build an ABI using their default toolchain, they can pass >>> the right ABI flag for it. >> They can't pass the right ABI flag because only the core parts of the >> toolchain have the concept of an ABI flag. >> >> Sure, binutils and gcc respect "-m32". But what about pkgconfig (and its >> clones pkgconf and pkgconfig-openbsd)? What about the *-config tools for >> various libraries? Are you going to patch all of them to respect "-m32"? > pkg-config does need fixing in some way. we already know this. it's why the > multilib eclasses currently set PKG_CONFIG_XXX vars -- preciously so the > correct ABI dir is utilized. and this breaks when using some build systems > (like scons) where the env gets blown away (although we also know scons > sucks). I pushed 0.28-r1 of dev-util/pkgconfig with ABI_X86 support so that you can directly call eg. i686-pc-linux-gnu-pkg-config to search from /usr/lib32/pkgconfig/ I'll try to figure something out for pkgconfig-openbsd too. Don't care about pkgconf. > i don't care about the *-config scripts. that's a dead concept long ago > proven to suck and anything still using it needs fixing. > nod