On Wed, 23 Jan 2013 08:03:56 -0300 Alexis Ballier <aball...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Jan 2013 09:24:26 +0100 > Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 10:27:30 -0300 > > Alexis Ballier <aball...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > > > > To be honest, I don't know if there's other way to hide USE flags > > > > than using USE_EXPAND_HIDDEN. If we want to use that, we'd have > > > > to split the flags per-arch, i.e. have: > > > > > > > > MULTILIB_AMD64="abi1 abi2 abi3" > > > > MULTILIB_PPC64="abi1 abi2 abi3" > > > > > > > > with appropriate USE_EXPAND_HIDDEN set by profiles. > > > > > > I don't like that at all. > > > I'd go for ABI= the union of all the MULTILIB_ABIS variables (if > > > there is no name collision) > > > we certainly want skype to depend on libitneeds[abi_x86], not > > > 'amd64? ( libitneeds[abi_amd64_x86] ) x86? ( libitneeds )' > > > > Just a quick idea. > > > > How would you feel about abi_x86_32? (similarly _64, _x32) > > > > That would be almost natural names with the trick variable being > > ABI_X86, therefore having all the fore-mentioned advantages. > > > > The deps would look like: > > > > libitneeds[abi_x86_32] > > > > Sounds good too, I just would want it to be shared between arches that > can: amd64/x86/x32, ppc/ppc64, mips, sparc32/sparc64, etc. > You mean you will hide ABI_X86 USE_EXPAND on non-x86 arches, right ? > This would have all the benefits I think, very good idea :) Yes. I'm currently looking for a clean way to hide it without having to repeat that in a dozen profiles. But it seems that portage and PMS disagree again about the shape of USE_EXPAND_HIDDEN... -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
