On Sun, Oct 07, 2018 at 10:46:56AM -0400, Eli Schwartz via aur-general wrote: > On 10/7/18 5:58 AM, Florian Bruhin wrote: > > That seems like a good idea, but I'm not sure a PKGBUILD should set it. > > Maybe makepkg even does it by itself? > Who says it's a good idea? When is it a good idea? How do you know that > it *should* be enabled in this case? Maybe there's things that depend on > it being unset? How do you know without doing a thorough review of the > makepkg codebase?
I wasn't considering that it'd stay enabled for makepkg as a whole. What I was trying to say is that I consider it a good idea in bash scripts in general. > Are you suggesting it would be a good idea for makepkg to do it itself, > globally? Or just as part of the environment it sets up for > user-supplied functions? It might be (either of those). Like you say, hard to judge without knowing the makepkg code in detail. Florian -- https://www.qutebrowser.org | [email protected] (Mail/XMPP) GPG: 916E B0C8 FD55 A072 | https://the-compiler.org/pubkey.asc I love long mails! | https://email.is-not-s.ms/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
