From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-dev+bounces-63947-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
	by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63F1A138247
	for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 17:47:26 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 84830E0ACA;
	Wed, 18 Dec 2013 17:47:21 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-qc0-f175.google.com (mail-qc0-f175.google.com [209.85.216.175])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9D062E0AB9
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 17:47:20 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-qc0-f175.google.com with SMTP id e9so6241644qcy.6
        for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 09:47:19 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=/m1Zo0ql5zdgZkJo996KgabJhTnSHdLCgQQKRzBVBKE=;
        b=lQAhnC0SKr5bL65qROIGeIk8Y/W7So4N+yp31RgHyEyEjJSRcXB0v9Idh3ojYq2G+P
         UU4WJvd2ubxoJlElD+6jG5OU6xyWlV5/V/Cxm593qbBalRqVCvutDZLB/5l4c6MxSZQ0
         wdShub+8P68H+w+/oHF2VOoXvn12cjH/5MLMyqM6KogQvJAVGTWWFBByOLfYYK59tJCN
         Fx7HZkPNJFVNcWFVAu6hIIktEKTk20P5+LgI+8smjJIVkgLyrmj86tiIjjES6yC+2Pgf
         KtcNG6gJOTLJF6NEvkTwB6KRTiaH02l4jvbnjN3BWuosClLB4DiprW9OXOMW3L1ygspL
         rcOw==
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.224.16.80 with SMTP id n16mr55793730qaa.42.1387388839930;
 Wed, 18 Dec 2013 09:47:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.140.39.133 with HTTP; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 09:47:19 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <613ecc5f-13f1-4fba-b0f1-9257908fff50@gentoo.org>
References: <20131218085447.56d1e133@gentoo.org>
	<86sitqtg5s.fsf@moguhome00.in.awa.tohoku.ac.jp>
	<04adfe90-a18b-45d5-9f81-90070c5090c0@gentoo.org>
	<52B1CF64.8020407@pathscale.com>
	<cb9700d7-2adc-4e7f-b374-92db4bdc7b03@gentoo.org>
	<52B1D5EA.7020106@pathscale.com>
	<613ecc5f-13f1-4fba-b0f1-9257908fff50@gentoo.org>
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 06:47:19 +1300
Message-ID: <CAATnKFC9bsX6XCppgRoWm=Bftr=V0X2SqDjrepUnjz6dQd=PQg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] How to support C++11 in libraries?
From: Kent Fredric <kentfredric@gmail.com>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Archives-Salt: 70b17fb4-3fa1-45b7-9aa6-f2ddd5468507
X-Archives-Hash: 848a370e02ba3f2b689d0847d7d73e42

On 19 December 2013 06:33, Jan Kundr=C3=A1t <jkt@gentoo.org> wrote:
> I'm worried by the cost of such a policy, though, because we would sudden=
ly
> have to patch some unknown amount of software


Given the nature that changing that CXX Flag globally for all users
could cause many packages to spontaneously fail to build, wouldn't
that imply that changing that flag would essentially be de-stabilizing
the whole tree, and a package being (arch) would no longer be an
indication of sane, tested behaviour?

This is really the perk of the USE driven process, the granular
piecemeal approach that does only as much as necessary, without
changing things that are already stable.

--=20
Kent