[Exherbo-dev] Crossing over to cross

Benedikt Morbach benedikt.morbach at googlemail.com
Sun Mar 1 21:43:19 UTC 2015

On Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 8:35 PM, Saleem Abdulrasool
<compnerd at compnerd.org> wrote:
> I think you missed one of the core points of all this work.  This is
> intended to remove multi build for the C class.  The use of multi build will
> persist, but for python, ruby, (perl?) ABIs, not the C class.

Just imagine I wrote multibuild_c there.

> Does something like `cave resolve -m cross -E i686 wine' not work for that?
> Yes, we would need to enhance the current label handling to understand
> cross.  However, given that the previous should allow you to build a
> cross-compiled wine (as an example), I think that we can live with this for
> the short term.

But all the build+run dependencies need to be cross compiled too and whenever
I did that, it installed wine to ::installed-i686 and everything else
to ::installed.
I may be grossly misunderstanding/misusing -E, but there doesn't seem
to be _any_
documentation for it afaict.
(well not actually wine, but it's the same for everything that has dependencies)

> I think that we can have a slightly lower bar for the merge.  My intention
> here is two fold.  One, it reduces the barrier to entry, allowing more
> people to contribute towards it.  cross has languished a bit as of late, and
> I would like to see that change.  The second objective is to reduce the
> overhead of maintaining cross.  There were issues that were introduced into
> cross due to merging.  Having to maintain paludis and arbor is a fair amount
> of work. There is no reason to not also branch all the other repositories,
> which only increases the amount of effort required to keep everything in
> sync.

Agreed on all points. If the above actually works I'm fine with merging.
I just don't want to break Exherbo for anyone who uses multibuild_c: 32 to get
skype, wine or something else to work, as I imagine that that would
upset some ;-)


More information about the Exherbo-dev mailing list