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 A6F2B1381F3 for ; Sun, 7 Apr 2013 10:52:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B38E8E0C80; Sun, 7 Apr 2013 10:52:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-we0-f174.google.com (mail-we0-f174.google.com [74.125.82.174]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA221E0C7F for ; Sun, 7 Apr 2013 10:52:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-we0-f174.google.com with SMTP id u12so3864766wey.5 for ; Sun, 07 Apr 2013 03:52:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:content-type; bh=HXp65kotVQhG20GMjdYvduyPBMYmoukV12UgtcjRLtg=; b=jaCqr3KKGc3081/THhYu7dqm0e47LkRAeuxJJMazMFe4zlDC/0IdZ6fIBL4mw1EMkK UeWxWLyRZV4Sy4wUdWMLyLxq0Qvf/3QsKiVwWOjR1L+AX7Y7N87ijvxhQyrMGTcW2YKU nPXWK45fFr8fFUcITLCwh6ZRi44G+E9nrPgNTefpHH/sQeg2C8xiPyOJvt/ClgmaBJN1 h6L4aYqcZs6bpPkrHJ3FUC/VsDQJCAaabf+9m/hjALD5iU23/9OEu3cXsapUkfUQpux3 ChBZxG+1uaxIpBF39F1sMs6cMLL94s+L5/Yk3RI65zT39HoNjxQg34FG/1qpUITyUzqs 0ANQ== X-Received: by 10.180.94.133 with SMTP id dc5mr2308808wib.1.1365331931166; Sun, 07 Apr 2013 03:52:11 -0700 (PDT) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: markos.chandras@gmail.com Received: by 10.194.121.136 with HTTP; Sun, 7 Apr 2013 03:51:30 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20817.55135.354752.397336@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20831.474.441795.677277@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20130406154314.0d7dc7ef@caribou.gateway.2wire.net> <201304070037.28554.dilfridge@gentoo.org> <20130406200511.01d4c0e9@caribou.gateway.2wire.net> <20130407082718.3e7d961f@googlemail.com> From: Markos Chandras Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2013 11:51:30 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: SRcLSGu2jn9SHFTzrzVz6BsZeVc Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2013-04-09 To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Archives-Salt: 4f797169-a4b1-47bf-8795-b74c02d99506 X-Archives-Hash: ead782ca85704922f3f28a74743c0911 On 7 April 2013 11:41, Ben de Groot wrote: > On 7 April 2013 18:13, Markos Chandras wrote: >> >> On 7 April 2013 08:27, Ciaran McCreesh >> wrote: >> > On Sat, 6 Apr 2013 20:05:11 -0600 >> > Ryan Hill wrote: >> >> In short: >> >> Toolchain packages, for better or worse, are built by eclass. We are >> >> not forward-porting toolchain.eclass every time someone decides there >> >> are too many EAPIs in the tree. Every change to that eclass breaks >> >> something (the trick is to break things people don't care about any >> >> more and hope no one notices). I don't know the ins and outs of >> >> glibc's eblits but I doubt they would be simple to port either. I >> >> also don't know much about toolchain-binutils.eclass, but it seems >> >> like it would be doable. >> > >> > Sounds like a good opportunity to replace toolchain.eclass with >> > something clean and understandable. >> > >> > -- >> > Ciaran McCreesh >> >> I see no reason to break something that works just fine as it is. >> > > Except it doesn't work just fine if it is so fragile as to break at the > smallest change (e.g. EAPI bump)... > Errr so you are just repeating what I said? It works fine as it is, it breaks with other EAPIs so just leave it as it is. -- Regards, Markos Chandras - Gentoo Linux Developer http://dev.gentoo.org/~hwoarang