On Fri, 9 Aug 2013 19:54:01 +0200 Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Dnia 2013-08-09, o godz. 19:23:50 > Thomas Sachau <to...@gentoo.org> napisał(a): > > > Alexis Ballier schrieb: > > > On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 18:32:04 +0200 > > > Thomas Sachau <to...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > > > >> Alexis Ballier schrieb: > > >>> On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 17:32:56 +0200 > > >>> Thomas Sachau <to...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> As the topic says, when someone converts an ebuild to multilib, > > >>>> please dont disable binary building for other ABIs, as has > > >>>> already been done for some packages. > > >>>> > > >>>> This will break e.g. for users who target 64bit toolchain and > > >>>> 32bit userland, since those would not get any binaries from > > >>>> building for none-default ABIs. > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>> - submit a patch against multilib_is_native_abi for those corner > > >>> cases > > >> > > >> huh? Please tell me, how a changed multilib_is_native_abi > > >> function would help here. Either you restrict something to > > >> native abi or you dont, having a check telling you "true - we > > >> are either native abi or not" is not really usefull, is it? > > >> > > > > > > native abi = the abi you want the binaries for and the one you > > > always build your libs with... > > > > so tell me the native abi for this case: toolchain=64bit, > > userland=32bit > > Excuse me, but where does such configuration occur? I don't think > Gentoo is providing stages like this. I think he's referring to mips team efforts to get a 64bits gcc (to lift the memory limit for debug builds of some c++ packages) but wanting to keep a ~x32 userland.
