2011/10/23 Samuli Suominen <ssuomi...@gentoo.org>:
> On 10/23/2011 04:27 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 8:39 AM, Samuli Suominen <ssuomi...@gentoo.org>
>> wrote:
>>> On 10/23/2011 03:00 PM, Tomas Chvatal (scarabeus) wrote:
>>>> scarabeus 11/10/23 12:00:55
>>>>
>>>> Modified: ChangeLog cdparanoia-3.10.2-r3.ebuild
>>>> Log:
>>>> Bump to eapi4 and punt static libs.
>>>
>>> Time to revert this commit as I don't see anything in the ebuild that
>>> disables building the static archives at compile phase.
>>>
>>> This is same as hiding the problem, not solving it. Not the way we do
>>> things at sound@.
>>>
>>>> + use static-libs || find "${ED}" -name '*.a' -exec rm -f {} +
>>
>> Doesn't reverting this seem a bit like shooting yourself in the foot
>> to remove an ingrown toenail?
>>
>> Unless I'm missing something this DOES get rid of the unneeded
>> archives. Now, sure, you'd save a few milliseconds of CPU if they
>> weren't built in the first place. However, you're proposing replacing
>> an ebuild that builds but doesn't install undesired files with one
>> that builds them AND installs them (since the hypothetical ebuild that
>> does neither doesn't exist yet).
>>
>> Perfection shouldn't hold us back from improvement. By all means open
>> up a bug asking for the next level of improvement if it really bothers
>> people.
>>
>> Now, if there is some subtle issue that causes issues during build if
>> the files are there and only removed at the last minute then clearly
>> that is a bigger problem.
>
> If you only wanted to remove these files, you are free to use
> INSTALL_MASK locally instead of downgrading the quality of tree.
>
> Do you have any idea how much time me, and aballier spent to make
> cdparanoia's build system as clean as it is now? And then to coordinate
> them with upstream xiph.org?
> Then I see this... Not acceptable by any standards.
>
>
So you would rather see me patch the makefile to drop the slib targets
conditionaly or alter whole src_compile to not run all but just lib on
the required options?
Both will take more space in the ebuild....
Or should I actually make the build system correct and rewrite it into
automake to use libtool?
Both take quite a lot time and since you state that you waste so much
on the build system anyway why didn't you fix it even before?
Anyway Since you are in the herd feel free to revert it as you already did so.
For that I have question, WHY THE FUCK DID YOU REVERT IT NOT USING ANY
CHANGELOG MESSAGE? If you would log this you would prevent others from
doing the same commit as me in the future, but yeah they are
developers they should use cvs log on the directory to see what samuli
had on his mind this time...
Anyway for they yajl i tried to submit patches for the build system
once and upstream is not interested so this is clear solution to solve
the issue without me having to patch half of the CMakeLists.txt.
