On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 17:57:20 -0600 Ryan Hill <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 22:36:53 +0100 > Michał Górny <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Currently, epunt_cxx always succeeds. This results in some > > of the ebuilds keeping its use even though the C++ checks were removed > > upstream. > > > > Therefore, I'm suggesting to add a simple check to the function -- if > > none of the patching attempts succeed, die requesting the user to remove > > the invocation. > > eqawarn? Yes, eqawarn if we don't want users to be hurt :P. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
