acl USE flag is masked on mips in profiles/arch/mips/use.mask. The comment there says that acl does not build on mips. However, now it builds w/o problems (at least sys-apps/acl-2.2.49, others not tested), so it's time to unmask this USE flag. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Try to emerge coreutils on mips 2. See that acl USE flag is masked
There are a whole lot more USE flags which could be unmasked, but I don't think this is a priority mainly due to shortage of maintainers with appropriate hardware to test. But you can unmask them locally in a /etc/portage/profile/use.mask file. Works fine for all my MIPS toys.
I haven't had a chance to test yet, but it's been on my todo list since before this bug report was opened, so I'll go ahead and unmask it. It'd be great if both of you guys would hang out in the #gentoo-mips irc channel on irc.freenode.net. :) Thanks for the report!
Thanks for unmasking the flag! I knew that USE flags can be unmasked locally in use.mask, but reported this bug in the interest of user experience. Currently my only MIPS system is Gentoo on TP-Link MR3420 (a small wireless router, kind of painful to play with with only 32MB RAM on board, but at least is physically small). There I see that a lot of packages don't have mips keywords (even ~mips). What is the Gentoo policy over this? Should bug be filled when unkeyworded package works fine on mips with **, or will this need a separate mips maintainer for this particular package?
(In reply to comment #3) > There I see that a lot of packages don't have mips keywords (even ~mips). > What is the Gentoo policy over this? > Should bug be filled when unkeyworded package works fine on mips with **, or > will this need a separate mips maintainer for this particular package? We don't do 'mips' (stable) keywords because of a lack of man-power and fast hardware, but if there are packages lacking ~mips that you think should have a keyword, feel free to open a bug. I can't guarantee that it'll be keyworded, but a bug report saying 'this works' goes a long way. :)
(In reply to comment #4) > We don't do 'mips' (stable) keywords because of a lack of man-power and fast > hardware, but if there are packages lacking ~mips that you think should have a > keyword, feel free to open a bug. I can't guarantee that it'll be keyworded, > but a bug report saying 'this works' goes a long way. :) OK, thank you, I will open bugs for the most important packages which I have tested on MIPS and which don't have ~mips keyword.
