On Friday 07 July 2006 12:18, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Jul 2006 16:20:08 +0200 Danny van Dyk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> | I suggest to add a "CPUFLAGS" USE_EXPAND variable to the tree.
> | This should be set to sane defaults in the profiles. I.e. for x86,
> | it should not set CPUFLAGS at all, and on AMD64 it should be
> | CPUFLAGS="mmx sse sse2"
>
> The issue with this is that $feature on amd64 is not exactly the same as
> $feature on x86. Would a better name be ${ARCH}_FEATURES or somesuch?
> That way there would be no confusion as to whether the cpuflags_sse2 USE
> flag did something for x86 or for amd64 or for both, since there'd be
> either x86_features_sse2 or amd64_features_sse2 or both.it would make handling in ebuilds a bit more complicated, but then again having a unified namespace here would make profile use.masking more complicated ... keeping all this information in the ebuild would make life a lot easier for developers even if it did make configure flag setup a bit more complicated > It'd also make handling use masking much easier. why ? because there wouldnt be anything to mask ? -mike
pgpGQQxuZ9LH7.pgp
Description: PGP signature
