Summary: | gcc64-flag should be use.mask'ed | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Hanno Böck <hanno> |
Component: | [OLD] Core system | Assignee: | SpanKY <vapier> |
Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
Severity: | normal | CC: | mips, plasmaroo, ppc64 |
Priority: | High | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- |
Description
Hanno Böck
![]() gcc64 USE flag shouldnt even exist (In reply to comment #1) > gcc64 USE flag shouldnt even exist Well, until that's done, can it be use.masked in base profile and unmasked on relavant arches only? (In reply to comment #2) > (In reply to comment #1) > > gcc64 USE flag shouldnt even exist > > Well, until that's done, can it be use.masked in base profile and unmasked on > relavant arches only? Arch teams, could you please do this? Some AMD64 users were confused about the flag. If you don't want to use.mask it I will just do it for amd64, but this is a far worse workaround, IMO. sparc done, unmasked for sparc64, left alone for sparc32 (doesn't need it, thus masking it is fine). hppa, mips: forgot to CC you before, please see comment #3 masked on amd64 for now Of all the ebuilds keyworded for hppa, only linux-headers-2.6.11-r5.ebuild is affected. It seems to do absolutely nothing there for hppa, so there is no need to unmask it for hppa. TBH, I don't think I've _ever_ seen this keyword used for anything mips related. So I'm tempted to just mask it. Will poke later at it and see about this. gcc64 no longer exists |