On 07/01/2012 02:34 PM, Thomas Sachau wrote: > Zac Medico schrieb: >> On 07/01/2012 04:29 AM, Thomas Sachau wrote: >>> Matt Turner schrieb: >>>> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Thomas Sachau <to...@gentoo.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>> >>>> I'm interested in this because I'm regularly annoyed with the emul- >>>> packages and also because multilib is pretty important for mips. >>>> >>>>> If a package has dependencies, then those dependencies are required to >>>>> have >>>>> at least the same targets enabled as the package >>>> >>>> That seems like the obvious (but perhaps naive) choice. What about >>>> depending on packages that don't install libraries, like x11-proto/ >>>> packages or generators like dev-util/indent? >>>> >>>> Maybe I just don't understand. Would these packages even have ABI flags? >>> >>> All packages do get the ABI flags (with the needed EAPI or via enabled >>> portage feature, which is currently in the multilib branch). >>> >>> If a package does not install anything ABI-specific (no headers, no libs >>> and no binaries), then there is no overhead, since it will just get >>> compiled/installed for one ABI, even if multiple ABI flags are enabled. >> >> For a package like this that does not install anything ABI-specific, >> does the package manager still execute phases for each enabled ABI, or >> is there some way for the ebuild to indicate whether or not its phases >> need to be executed for each enabled ABI? >> > > > This is dynamicly checked at runtime, no need to modify the ebuilds and > also no needless compilation, when there is no ABI-specific content. > > A more detailed answer at package manager level: > After the src_install phase for the first requested ABI has been > finished, the content of $DESTDIR is checked. If there is no ABI > specific content, the other enabled ABIs are skipped and the following > steps are done as usual.
I think it would be helpful to include a short explanation of these kinds of details in the GLEP, in order to help people wrap their heads around the whole thing (possibly avoiding the "Huh?" kind of reaction that you got from Brian). -- Thanks, Zac
