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 4A46713877A for ; Mon, 16 Jun 2014 19:47:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A57ADE0EEF; Mon, 16 Jun 2014 19:47:23 +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 BEEE7E0EB2 for ; Mon, 16 Jun 2014 19:47:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from 127.0.0.1 (lumumba.torservers.net [77.247.181.163]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: hasufell) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B21A333FFDD for ; Mon, 16 Jun 2014 19:47:20 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <539F49C2.6090008@gentoo.org> Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 19:47:14 +0000 From: hasufell 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: Re: Re: crossdev and multilib interference References: <53208139.2040509@gentoo.org> <1660834.UE1ARX9orZ@vapier> <20140327084108.GA3654@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk> <31757180.gTPZtqku3h@vapier> <20140330095348.GA18419@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk> <539E03A9.3010109@gentoo.org> <539E0563.3080302@gentoo.org> <539EF323.7020208@gentoo.org> <1402944163.8309.2.camel@oswin.hackershack.net> <539F462E.6050905@gentoo.org> <20140616214257.096c93fc@marga.jer-c2.orkz.net> In-Reply-To: <20140616214257.096c93fc@marga.jer-c2.orkz.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 7178938d-5834-417b-88fc-ba23aa8dbd09 X-Archives-Hash: a3ae9f4089bf9620e6353a36c7b4b6f4 Jeroen Roovers: > On Mon, 16 Jun 2014 19:31:58 +0000 > hasufell wrote: > >> Also check the history of this thread for a few proposed solutions. > > The history of this thread and the history of gx86-multilib and > crossdev development suggest that crossdev was doing nothing wrong until > gx86-multilib came around and a problem was found between them. Masking > either for the benefit of the other would be, and let me quote the > history of this thread out of context just to fit in with the tone and > mode this sub-thread has taken, "asinine". > This isn't about right or wrong. This is about actual breakage on stable systems. Solutions were proposed, nothing has happened for months. So I don't see what else we can do here other than taking more radical steps to INFORM users of these possible breakages... and that's exactly what a hardmask is for.