On Friday 15 June 2012 12:52:56 Michał Górny wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 11:11:58 -0400 wrote:
> > On Friday 15 June 2012 09:32:18 Michał Górny wrote:
> > > # Remove static libs we're not supposed to link
> > >
> > > against. if grep -q '^shouldnotlink=yes$' "${f}"; then
> > > - einfo "Removing unnecessary
> > > ${archivefile#${D%/}}"
> > > - rm -f "${archivefile}"
> > > + if [[ -f ${archivefile} ]]; then
> > > + einfo "Removing unnecessary
> > > ${archivefile#${D%/}} (static
> > plugin)"
> > > + rm -f "${archivefile}"
> > > + fi
> >
> > highly unlikely, but this would skip symlinks that are broken in $D,
> > but valid once merged into $ROOT
>
> Are you suggesting || -L?if you want to be pessimistic that someday this might happen, then yeah. or just leave it and wait for someone to complain. > Not that I see a case where an external-symlink .a is installed alongside > local .la file... true. probably not common (or even uncommon), but not impossible. -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
