From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-dev+bounces-63583-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 1942E138247
for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 15:31:35 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 384E3E0A4A;
Fri, 15 Nov 2013 15:31:30 +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 42AD7E09BA
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 15:31:29 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54A4933EED5
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 15:31:26 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at gentoo.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.229
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.229 tagged_above=-999 required=5.5
tests=[AWL=-1.226, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001,
SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([IPv6:::ffff:127.0.0.1])
by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [IPv6:::ffff:127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id XeMZNbh42b3O for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>;
Fri, 15 Nov 2013 15:31:20 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3])
(using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 94E6B33EE92
for <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 15:31:20 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69)
(envelope-from <lnx-gentoo-dev@m.gmane.org>)
id 1VhLMZ-0004H6-MM
for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 16:31:15 +0100
Received: from ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.231.22.224])
by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
for <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 16:31:15 +0100
Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
for <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 16:31:15 +0100
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net>
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: Please consider removing use.stable.mask and
package.use.stable.mask
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 15:30:56 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <pan$6350e$e22250ea$97e41b79$e6e8a49c@cox.net>
References: <slrnl86l1s.j7e.vaeth@lounge.imp.fu-berlin.de>
<20131113151012.04145837@gentoo.org> <5283948F.1000409@gentoo.org>
<52841023.9010208@gentoo.org> <20131114061328.09136f6f@gentoo.org>
<CAB9SyzTB3Nqd8bsFpRoFvgU-RHuB4W7CG76La6qu-WQ4O7kS0g@mail.gmail.com>
<CAGfcS_kJM+0_BykpaXCcxRXi9Tw2jz=jx3Khsa6Ou_3uX6mUOA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAB9SyzSqd1fW=v1NOjetHKCX0+WxHNgWreC5JqUsEZj4RaFL3A@mail.gmail.com>
<CAGfcS_nrGjs4hw0udBFeCbHyNR4=x6GK_YNuTzNtm1gL+XKayQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAB9SyzRyjeEfWLWLw82W+aZE1gDowgnbaKwRurMRR7V2kx0ABA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAGfcS_ka=m0EjoSdTX2QgF4oN30zpUEm+C=5nTZxT-jBfzD4rQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAB9SyzRX38zFT8ZKV+kNNfc2PnHqqisXSDUUbNvTVCQvdzDdrg@mail.gmail.com>
<21125.51627.48994.939938@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de>
<pan$d0f5e$e0d59542$c111e5c2$c6c16f1e@cox.net>
<52863020.8040809@gentoo.org>
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
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org
X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net
User-Agent: Pan/0.140 (Chocolate Salty Balls; GIT 6e6fd84
/usr/src/portage/src/egit-src/pan2)
X-Archives-Salt: a7a8ee1a-4b81-47a4-afea-2a706c1e970e
X-Archives-Hash: 092aa10c92de8758703af4a4b344f8e0
Ian Stakenvicius posted on Fri, 15 Nov 2013 09:30:56 -0500 as excerpted:
> On 15/11/13 06:08 AM, Duncan wrote:
>> [2] 32-bit for amd64, but could be the reverse, 64-bit for x86, or
>> either one for x86-32, or some other combination for other archs.
>
> Well, not really -- an x86 toolchain can't build for amd64 or x32 , you
> need a crossdev for that. I don't think either multilib-portage or the
> multilib-eclass solution are going to be substantive enough to
> incorporate crossdev building directly into the package manager.
Good point. I let my efforts to be inclusive get the best of my common
sense. =:^(
--
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman