On Thu, May 25, 2000 at 12:30:32AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > > > > > Every time you put more than one shell command (this > > > > > includes using a loop) in a makefile command you > > > > > - <em>must</em> make sure that errors are trapped. For > > > > > + should make sure that errors are trapped. > > > > This must remain a `must', not doing so usually results in incomplete or > > > > unbuildable packages. > > If half of the package is missing because of an undetected error in the > > build process, it's a RC bug. It's better to leave this as is. > > If it actually causes problems, it's an RC bug, but that's because of > the problems it causes; if it doesn't cause problems, it doesn't matter as > much.
But how could it not not cause problems? (I hope you understand what I mean :) I've never seen something like this produce something benign. Can you give such example? > It's still worth filing a bug about, but if it's not causing problems, > then why throw the whole package out? Well, I file RC bugs to get them fixed, not to get the package removed. (the former should happen, the latter is just an ugly necessity if !former) :o) > Making it a "must" doesn't make the bug any easier to detect, or any easier > to fix, And that matters? > or, I'd hope, any less likely to be fixed in a package that's getting > updated. Well, people should generally pay more attention to RC bugs. Anyway, never mind details like this now; can someone tell us when will the whole thing enter Policy? Manoj, Julian? -- Digital Electronic Being Intended for Assassination and Nullification
