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 65999138CDB for ; Thu, 11 Jun 2015 07:21:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 27068E08F4; Thu, 11 Jun 2015 07:21:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8AFBEE08F3 for ; Thu, 11 Jun 2015 07:21:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from big_daddy.dol-sen.ca (S010634bdfa9ecf80.vc.shawcable.net [96.49.31.57]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: dolsen) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3A59A340ABD for ; Thu, 11 Jun 2015 07:21:24 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2015 00:21:20 -0700 From: Brian Dolbec To: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH v2] install-qa-check.d: issue warnings for 32bit ELFs not using LFS Message-ID: <20150611002120.0b0ea7f3.dolsen@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <20150530143534.GE2101@vapier> References: <1432626293-22692-1-git-send-email-vapier@gentoo.org> <1432650278-31471-1-git-send-email-vapier@gentoo.org> <5564983E.20306@gentoo.org> <20150530143534.GE2101@vapier> Organization: Gentoo Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 5ab1db43-bea9-457e-85f8-512783171510 X-Archives-Hash: aa0bce9b863b478169be65c02e793a13 On Sat, 30 May 2015 10:36:05 -0400 Mike Frysinger wrote: > > so if we're happy with this implementation, i'll start a thread on > gentoo-dev so people aren't caught by surprise, and we can merge this > for the next release. -mike So, what's the status of this one? I don't recall many responses to the -dev thread. -- Brian Dolbec