Re: [gentoo-mips] On MIPS using the same CHOST for all multilib ABIs

["Michał Górny" <mgorny@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2143 bytes --]

Dnia 2014-01-17, o godz. 18:20:30
Markos Chandras <hwoarang@gentoo.org> napisał(a):

> On 01/17/2014 04:47 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> > Dnia 2014-01-16, o godz. 17:29:43 "Anthony G. Basile"
> > <blueness@gentoo.org> napisał(a):
> > 
> >> On 01/16/2014 04:24 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> >>> Because AC_PATH_TOOL uses CHOST and some random Gentoo
> >>> invention.
> >> 
> >> I got that AC_PATH_TOOL and AC_CHECK_TOOL prefix whatever utility
> >> they search for with the canonicalized chost (usually from
> >> config.guess), but I still don't see why we need this to avoid
> >> hackery?  Can you give me a practial example because right now I
> >> just don't see a serious problem.
> > 
> > libgpg-error installs ${CHOST}-gpg-error-config.
> > 
> > Now libgcrypt (and possibly other tools) are using AC_PATH_TOOL to
> > find it. If we have proper CHOSTs, they find the right
> > gpg-error-config and we don't have to put any more effort into
> > that. Then libgcrypt installs ${CHOST}-libgcrypt-config.
> > 
> > Now other tools are using AC_PATH_TOOL to find proper
> > libgcrypt-config. If we have proper CHOSTs, it just works and we
> > don't have to put any more effort into that.
> > 
> > Same goes for LLVM & Mesa.
> > 
> > If we play by the rules nicely, all pieces fit together nicely and
> > we don't have to worry. If we don't, we ask the developers to spit
> > Gentoo- specific hackery all over the place.
> > 
> You need to consider that besides changing CHOST to new stages (which
> is a lengthy and tiring process), you somehow need to migrate existing
> users to the new CHOST (no?) otherwise the multilib eclass (or any
> other eclass/package) that depends on CHOST will be broken as soon as
> they update their tree and try to install package updates.
> This is definitely not a pleasant user experience.

Well, I'd like someone who knows better than I do to explain how much
does changing non-native CHOST affect. I will try to test it a bit by
changing CHOST_x86=i686-pc-linux-gnu to i386-* locally but an expert
opinion would be preferred.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 966 bytes --]