From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-user+bounces-163952-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
	by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5DE6138C9D
	for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Sat, 25 Apr 2015 10:40:21 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A7B20E088F;
	Sat, 25 Apr 2015 10:40:12 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-ig0-f176.google.com (mail-ig0-f176.google.com [209.85.213.176])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 98D9FE0887
	for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 25 Apr 2015 10:40:11 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by igbyr2 with SMTP id yr2so32948758igb.0
        for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 25 Apr 2015 03:40:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject
         :from:to:content-type;
        bh=P7DqzjJbg2VrPE8E81me+M23o3Y5HH2CYts2ENeH564=;
        b=LaOfbgaaIvAI5PWbsWcGRuOKN5gclK7YH7mM0CqBSGsv6+lkzLqI6oGQIbt4gf/+D3
         3ANEuxYncQ14yIYMqSC6tdZs37KKYT+IJCDM0WjRTOcK/NMa8D5Cyu9bCQVOm+BgV0mh
         jIpohmOPCp+DPpCmM1cdqv5OUNSAHNYirC/fklIezRZoDslJz+DIm0nJXzyupeIrnfLO
         SSRgvX0QEk8oefsQwmhl/m1JNMOL1zUmsm6k8tbgeDNk3Zz3J/wV0FPuSsVKNarYgM48
         35JMK3WDE85Je2vgEIAmoB3KWJ8S0N480/d1uPxz7rJdb3c25Eo4kCj493/CH+dT8+xb
         UoiQ==
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.107.135.144 with SMTP id r16mr3271030ioi.13.1429958410950;
 Sat, 25 Apr 2015 03:40:10 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com
Received: by 10.107.48.66 with HTTP; Sat, 25 Apr 2015 03:40:10 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20238.1429935003@ccs.covici.com>
References: <12441.1429904241@ccs.covici.com>
	<CAJ0EP41yGfFtqJYdy4jPXCd7rT-8z4XmbH2V=WWKBu3qXWeOnQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<10896.1429908712@ccs.covici.com>
	<CAJ0EP437_pv=EuMNk43Sehb8065YnmLiSkxz+WE-CgbOxm6Q4A@mail.gmail.com>
	<7152.1429913341@ccs.covici.com>
	<CAJ0EP40u_229sdZeaZb116WjU=K01ZS9m-UG2t3SqGoV5=SjQA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20238.1429935003@ccs.covici.com>
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2015 06:40:10 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 46EvfBOf6BmXPeKDEwt_rALK3f4
Message-ID: <CAGfcS_=znc1fVomPG4zDHuT5R1MN4=dWt6JXMnV5oB7sYYxu6w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] serious problems trying to go to new abi_x86_32 support
From: Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Archives-Salt: 1b3f903a-b1e9-4de3-8c49-4a0137e9b7ca
X-Archives-Hash: ca8b7a99261429b2daf33d8d765ae3d5

On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 12:10 AM,  <covici@ccs.covici.com> wrote:
> Well, now that I have put abi_x86_32 in make.conf and did those 80
> packages and fixed the preserved_libs, in my next update it wants to do
> 199 reinstalls to get every possible package which has that flag -- do I
> need all that or should I go back to the individual packages, now that
> things are fixed  as far as the libs are concerned?  Do I gain anything
> by having all those packages have that flagg set?

That's up to personal preference.  You've already found a few on this
list telling you that you should just set it in make.conf.  You won't
have trouble finding many others (including me) who will tell you to
just stick it in package.use when needed only.

The only thing you gain is being able to run 32-bit applications
against those libraries, even if you don't have any need to.  The only
thing you lose is a bunch of inodes, and maybe some compile time.

-- 
Rich