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 99FA01391DB for ; Sun, 16 Mar 2014 12:01:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 138DFE0AD0; Sun, 16 Mar 2014 12:01:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-vc0-f176.google.com (mail-vc0-f176.google.com [209.85.220.176]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 27EF4E0A53 for ; Sun, 16 Mar 2014 12:01:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-vc0-f176.google.com with SMTP id lc6so4654667vcb.35 for ; Sun, 16 Mar 2014 05:01:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=8LsjJsrEc+TQxzMfR3q04eGivGPOIDeDA5e1pntLrAU=; b=RsPJDtguv+LKoVKjV2cWmOPz1KfKRtqW9TS1615OcbSVpjHiLvD1ELl8haTu9MQ2Gn Q5L994KABdmM3TC/X+RF8sVJXEqlawotXfF4nNRQM13XDDj5LnNTpaRGzT/Mkw5ZEZgq fE+qumFtmXXthpn8pfDf/LXpyeKBSnwa3gz4BwLTPyjUcL6t2rg954QrkruU1W6BKmBg jydBTGPpxzUAU7BZ6+N2KlY9ipke/U9cXc4L2eGKMlBdi5Ra8qfQlfQZM0jPRvnDowki ethGM+9ItbFEicnUpmws3Aysut5c2jG8wLv+bHBcMR/IasErnmeBgjDYJDtngYaDHM4I Q7NA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnohz80dLsl7z65Lp3KEh5oKhLS1O7gASCGM+dMrJXsra1bJfz/z75l5Aoo7WGxC1hnPU48 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 X-Received: by 10.52.26.161 with SMTP id m1mr1678454vdg.24.1394971285084; Sun, 16 Mar 2014 05:01:25 -0700 (PDT) Sender: gmt@be-evil.net Received: by 10.220.100.138 with HTTP; Sun, 16 Mar 2014 05:01:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [75.147.143.254] In-Reply-To: <1394640392.7647.18.camel@rook> References: <53208139.2040509@gentoo.org> <1394640392.7647.18.camel@rook> Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 05:01:25 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: AH-B4Wz_uhQzTCPKWtKANlWCdFs Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] crossdev and multilib interference From: Greg Turner To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf307c9efceb709404f4b80fb7 X-Archives-Salt: 947db434-faca-49ea-b3dc-afeb175757a9 X-Archives-Hash: 392f770067435f9f587344cbd623310e --20cf307c9efceb709404f4b80fb7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 9:06 AM, Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote: > is there any legitimate reason for > wanting crossdev's i686 wrappers when on a multilib amd64 profile? > One other note: legitimacy is in the eye of the legitimizer, I suppose, but there are sometimes practical reasons to want a no-multilib compiler. A trivial example is that some primitive build scripts go ape when CC has a space in it (but this is certainly debatable as to its legitimacy, given the obvious work-arounds). --20cf307c9efceb709404f4b80fb7 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

= On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 9:06 AM, Alexandre Rostovtsev <= ;tetromino@gentoo= .org> wrote:
is = there any legitimate reason for
wanting crossdev's i686 wrappers when on a multilib amd64 profile?

One other note: le= gitimacy is in the eye of the legitimizer, I suppose, but there are sometim= es practical reasons to want a no-multilib compiler.

A trivial e= xample is that some primitive build scripts go ape when CC has a space in i= t (but this is certainly debatable as to its legitimacy, given the obvious = work-arounds).
--20cf307c9efceb709404f4b80fb7--