On 06/17/2014 08:48, hasufell wrote: > Joshua Kinard: >> >> Equally using the Council as a hammer all the time doesn't work in the >> long-term, either. > > This is exactly the case where the council has to step in to solve > global issues and those between projects (here it is embedded gentoo > project and multilib project).
multilib needs a lot of things fixed. Everyone is pretty much aware that we don't have solid support for multilib, just enough hacks in place that it seems to JustWork(TM), for now. But I think this is a wider issue in a lot of GNU packages anyways, as the design mentality for many of them assumed binary distro installs w/ a single ABI selected. I am not convinced that a lot of the packages in the tree are being broken by crossdev, when they are probably making assumptions about the build environment that aren't multilib-safe. If that's the case, it's those build systems that need patching, not hard-masking crossdev. That all said, you still haven't put forth a really convincing argument that people can agree on. And if you can't convince normal devs, do you think you can convince council members? What if you're rebuffed at a council meeting on this issue? What do you do then? Not everything is a nail that the council needs to whack with a hammer. Sometimes, you need an impact driver, a blow torch, or a simple Robertson square-drive screwdriver. -- Joshua Kinard Gentoo/MIPS ku...@gentoo.org 4096R/D25D95E3 2011-03-28 "The past tempts us, the present confuses us, the future frightens us. And our lives slip away, moment by moment, lost in that vast, terrible in-between." --Emperor Turhan, Centauri Republic
