On 09/23/2012 03:02 AM, hasufell wrote: > On 09/23/2012 11:56 AM, Michał Górny wrote: >>> So i would prefer some help/support with multilib-portage to get >>> it accepted sooner, instead of this additional workaround for a >>> subset of packages. > >> I prefer the simpler solution. > > > I prefer the stronger solution. This is just a quick workaround. > > -1 >
I'm in favor of adding multilib functions to the package manager in a future EAPI, but I'm not convinced that the current multilib-portage branch is using the best design. For example, it recently came to my attention that it calls pkg_preinst in a loop for each multilib-ABI. This seems like a bad idea to me, since pkg_preinst often contains stuff that only needs to run once, rather than for each multilib-ABI. I would prefer that such loops be coded explicitly in pkg_preinst whenever they are needed, and approach taken by the proposed autotools-multilib.eclass is more in alignment with this preference. -- Thanks, Zac
