-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 16/06/14 04:05 PM, Joshua Kinard wrote: > On 06/16/2014 15:47, hasufell wrote: >> So I don't see what else we can do here other than taking more >> radical steps to INFORM users of these possible breakages... and >> that's exactly what a hardmask is for. > > What about those of us who have been using crossdev to generate > cross-compilers for years w/o issue, because we run non-multilib? > Hardmasking crossdev to solve multilib problems doesn't accomplish > anything, other than just irk us. Why not hardmask the multilib > stuff instead and leave crossdev alone?
well, we could hardmask in the multilib profiles... but that's a bit of a digression -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlOfUyYACgkQ2ugaI38ACPA1TAD+JYjgKnwabCy9qPiwZAKgXkxH Nj4kzhLSQ0HF+5CCHIYBAKEG8Yt65JhTIKOCwEHLx+7Kh4p0xtZcVBLnE3dIROrf =iyqN -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
