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 E51E813877A for ; Wed, 18 Jun 2014 14:18:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C3977E0A65; Wed, 18 Jun 2014 14:18:35 +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 D7D29E09AA for ; Wed, 18 Jun 2014 14:18:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.130] (CPE002401f30b73-CM78cd8ec1b205.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com [99.224.181.112]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: axs) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D1BBD340114 for ; Wed, 18 Jun 2014 14:18:33 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <53A19FAA.5000907@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 10:18:18 -0400 From: Ian Stakenvicius User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 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: 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> <539F49C2.6090008@gentoo.org> <539F4DFA.7020706@gentoo.org> <539F5288.1000000@gentoo.org> <539F5AB5.7000006@gentoo.org> <539F6B3C.7030807@gentoo.org> <539F8000.5080804@gentoo.org> <539F9E41.9050505@gentoo.org> <539FA536.3010401@gentoo.org> <53A034F4.2000900@gentoo.org> <53A04DF6.6050407@gentoo.org> <1403017001.11300.1.camel@rook> <53A05CC5.9070808@gentoo.org> <1403068120.20262.1.camel@rook> <53A130AA.10002@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <53A130AA.10002@gentoo.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: f7836fac-e01a-400f-8d94-153040d3bace X-Archives-Hash: 098542b92781146cbb36ca7354675004 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 18/06/14 02:24 AM, Joshua Kinard wrote: > IOW, it looks like less than 1.5% of the tree contains multilib > packages that rely on pkgconfig that could be affected by crossdev > installing the ${CHOST}-pkg-config link into PATH. > > We all have different measurements of things, but in my book, that > doesn't even begin to qualify for "non-trivial tree-wide problem". > If we were talking close to 5%-10% of packages affected, that to me > would be worth some serious discussion. Only one problem with that -- if much of that 1.5% is packages in @system , then it doesn't matter how much of the tree it is in terms of end-user impact. It's all about how close these packages are to the root. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlOhn6oACgkQ2ugaI38ACPB/+gEArO/jkT/TTbIfLKiJ1IkoPSFY /hDasDudl9jXcHLhBtQA/1qGj7fbzLfb3Sg/ptfhe2YfRiXGxWnYdh5/uWjuJeFg =SJeW -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----