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 67C2C138247 for ; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 22:52:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 64E91E0998; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 22:52:51 +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 7D216E0825 for ; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 22:52:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A78BE33F26C for ; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 22:52:49 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at gentoo.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.228 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.228 tagged_above=-999 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-1.225, 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 sl9PMYtfbeBS for ; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 22:52:43 +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 7A4FC33F165 for ; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 22:52:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VhojF-0000yp-CA for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 23:52:37 +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 ; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 23:52:37 +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 ; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 23:52:37 +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: Sat, 16 Nov 2013 22:52:16 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <20131113151012.04145837@gentoo.org> <5283948F.1000409@gentoo.org> <52841023.9010208@gentoo.org> <20131114061328.09136f6f@gentoo.org> <20131115233934.7142bb04@gentoo.org> <1384590157.1308.13.camel@belkin5> 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 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: 8839e253-03c0-4403-8ddd-52d2e50a88de X-Archives-Hash: bf049eb92c9eb981b1bcd6fc99e9cc99 Martin Vaeth posted on Sat, 16 Nov 2013 12:39:37 +0000 as excerpted: > A "cleaner" solution would somehow treat the 32bit and 64bit variant > like separate packages, each having its own set of USE-Flags, and also > the possibility to rebuild one without rebuilding the other. AFAIK > multilib-portage can do this. I'm not sure about multlib-portage, but the chroot option certainly treats them as separate packages, each with its own config, because that's exactly what they are, there! =:^) -- 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