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 B1A8D1381F3 for ; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 15:39:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5B83AE09EB; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 15:38:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5797FE09D4 for ; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 15:38:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qe0-f46.google.com (mail-qe0-f46.google.com [209.85.128.46]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mattst88) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 63663335E30 for ; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 15:38:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qe0-f46.google.com with SMTP id nd7so4147127qeb.5 for ; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 08:38:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=/z1tSeACNb4gLGrSwIwPsMM9IBH3hlVikZZenljLGtM=; b=plOs30hgK8+NPO6Op7E3q8twDc1T4Jk4K1z2h3IK6GJMJ3X+8q+XccBkNQ36q2EFro 2SWf88U8YddNVoYo3sJj6WWh5brWP7ibVNrmLXzjIVlVlc+FMp7iPr3D6/z+6Q0+QHht bfU+JVVd/33Osab54lR7DyXj1x3oknKswd6Opy7Dh4iCb/03MaTsTwmByOOvSbuzvkGM +TDz/KdNl/2wIJAPPr9jZvm/hCQhBgp1FaiUEsFHKIkxJXxle6CYHOn0u6fDzPktWZOb 5zFQNmmELTe7QiwooiVSFIhBiYVX6706wvziz2b7fT3AhA1efHQMU3LSXjImFv1wqkk7 Tkjw== X-Received: by 10.49.50.162 with SMTP id d2mr4629019qeo.17.1366645117986; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 08:38:37 -0700 (PDT) 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 Received: by 10.49.28.41 with HTTP; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 08:38:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20130421214304.7b08fa57@pomiocik.lan> From: Matt Turner Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 08:38:17 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] FYI: emul-linux-x86-xlibs deps being replaced in gx86 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Cc: multilib@gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 755f0473-e862-4da7-aff7-36270d3a525b X-Archives-Hash: 1cb5e66066d3e60fe26d75af23285665 On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 5:21 AM, Ben de Groot wrote: > On 22 April 2013 03:43, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I'd like to give you a heads up and explanation on what I'm doing >> today. >> >> I'm in the process of converting emul-linux-x86-xlibs dependencies >> in gx86 with any-of dependencies supporting both emul-linux and split >> multilib packages. >> >> The goal of that process is to allow peaceful co-existence of both >> solutions while the migration work is being and a smooth transition >> once it's done. >> >> The common kind of committed dep now looks like: >> >> || ( >> ( >> x11-libs/libXfoo[abi_x86_32] >> x11-libs/libXbar[abi_x86_32] >> ) >> app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-xlibs >> ) >> >> And before you ask -- it works better than I'd expect it to. Portage >> just does the right thing depending on ABI_X86 setting. From my quick >> (and not thorough tests), it even seems to handle switching >> from emul-linux to multilib packages and back. >> >> There are two notes however: >> >> 1. well, the deps aren't that 100% awesome in EAPI<5 with paludis. It >> may not enforce USE-deps correctly, but a global ABI_X86 setting plus >> @world rebuild will make it work fine. but anyway -- whenever possible, >> please try to migrate packages to EAPI=3D5. >> >> 2. some of the binary packages may actually prefer versioned deps to >> ensure matching SONAME. >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny > > > It should come as no surprise that I am not happy with this. While I appl= aud > your efforts to attempt to improve the multilib situation, I don't think = we > are quite at the stage yet where this can be pushed as the default choice= , > as you are doing now. > > In my opinion this belongs in an overlay for further development and much > more extensive testing. You are now pushing this to ebuilds that may very > well go stable within weeks =E2=80=94 unless I'm missing something and yo= u are > masking these features / useflags on stable. > > I am also not convinced this is the approach to multilib that we should b= e > taking, and I know there are others for who this is controversial as well= . > > -- > Cheers, > > Ben | yngwin > Gentoo developer > Gentoo Qt project lead, Gentoo Wiki admin Do I assume correctly that this is a response to the freetype and fontconfig multilib bugs?