On 09/09/2014 02:38 PM, Brian Dolbec wrote: > On Mon, 1 Sep 2014 22:05:45 -0700 > Brian Dolbec <[email protected]> wrote: > >> This code had portage bin path hard coded. That path needed to be >> changed for a new portage ebuild and install system. >> After testing the origianl code and comparing it with some updated >> code supplied by Douglas Freed. It turned out both code chunks >> resulted in nothing being cleaned. >> >> Tested and confirmed by zero_chaos. > > I have gone over things more and tested the new find command. It does > work on my host system. However, the question remains... DOES this > particular cleaning operation NEED to be performed? > > With current the tree snapshot for my testing 20140829. It does not > find anything to clean. BUT, will that remain the same in the future > as pkgs are bumped? > > For safety, I'd be inclined to keep the find command (v1 of the > patch) and clean any it does find just in case. >
If we truly need to remove these files, I don't think catalyst was ever the place to do this. We have USE=static and USE=static-libs for a reason. Randomly removing files from the filesystem was a hack then, and if we are cleaning this up let's just remove it. If I want to build things with USE=static or USE=static-libs then catalyst shouldn't be pointlessly crippling my builds. v2 means one less horrible hack in catalyst, and one at a time is the only way will remove all the horror. -Zero
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
