[gentoo-dev] RFC: News item about musl upgrade

2014-10-21 Thread Anthony G. Basile
Hi everyone, musl is an experimental new standard C library. Its actively being developed by Rich Felker (dalias) and I've got it working in Gentoo for amd64, i686, armv7a and mipsel3. The amd64 and armv7a stages even have userland hardening. musl only recently got Native Language Support

[gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: News item regarding c++98 vs c++11

2014-10-21 Thread Martin Vaeth
Mike Gilbert wrote: > > FYI, Chromium currently has a ban on using C++ 11 library features. I do not see how this would help to avoid the problem: If a function with the same name returns a different type in c++98 than in c++11, you could only avoid the problem by not using the function at all (n

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: News item regarding c++98 vs c++11

2014-10-21 Thread Paweł Hajdan, Jr.
On 10/21/14 4:25 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote: > On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 4:45 AM, Martin Vaeth wrote: >> Ian Stakenvicius wrote: >>> On 20/10/14 06:58 AM, Anthony G. Basile wrote: >>> I don't think we'll ever want to support a mixed abi system. >>> >>> Can we, even? Would it be a mixed-abi system

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: News item regarding c++98 vs c++11

2014-10-21 Thread Mike Gilbert
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 4:45 AM, Martin Vaeth wrote: > Ian Stakenvicius wrote: >> On 20/10/14 06:58 AM, Anthony G. Basile wrote: >> >>> I don't think we'll ever want to support a mixed abi system. >> >> Can we, even? Would it be a mixed-abi system or a multi-abi system? > > I am afraid, we *have

[gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: News item regarding c++98 vs c++11

2014-10-21 Thread Martin Vaeth
Ian Stakenvicius wrote: > On 20/10/14 06:58 AM, Anthony G. Basile wrote: > >> I don't think we'll ever want to support a mixed abi system. > > Can we, even? Would it be a mixed-abi system or a multi-abi system? I am afraid, we *have* to, in the moment when at least one program adds -std=c++11 or