Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 13-11-2012

[William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1593 bytes --]

On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 02:07:23PM -0300, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 11:38:20 -0500
> William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
> [...]
> > > The end result of this assumption is that the use of
> > > gen_usr_ldscript() and the move of libs from /usr/lib to /lib will
> > > become deprecated, correct?  I think it's pertinent to note this (or
> > > whatever other changes will then be requested/required for Council
> > > to decide on) within this discussion, if not also within the
> > > "plan"..
> > 
> > On Linux, yes, you are correct. I wouldn't propose touching it for the
> > *bsd platforms.
> > 
> > Also, once everyone switches over, this deprecation would be
> > transparent. The calls to gen_usr_ldscript would be removed from
> > ebuilds where possible, and the function itself could be disabled on
> > linux. Once this is done, when packages are rebuilt, the libraries
> > would migrate back to /usr/lib.
> 
> 
> (I hadn't seen that thread.)
> 
> Removing it from ebuilds implies touching it for *bsd platforms. A lot
> of ebuilds are shared between the g/*bsd and g/linux port, that's
> somewhat the point of the whole thing. Of course, there may be
> linux-only packages where the calls to gen_usr_ldscript will become
> useless, but in general these calls should remain and the function
> shall be a no-op on platforms where this is desired.
 
 That's what I said. The calls could be removed "where possible",
 meaning linux-only ebuilds. You can tell from the KEYWORDS which
 ebuilds this would apply to. :-)

William


[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]