On 02/24/19 04:04, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Sat, 2019-02-23 at 22:19 -0800, Matt Turner wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 8:30 PM desultory <desult...@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 02/20/19 02:36, Michał Górny wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 2019-02-20 at 07:20 +0100, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 20 Feb 2019, Matt Turner wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>     # Don't install libtool archives (even for modules)
>>>>>> -   prune_libtool_files --all
>>>>>> +   find "${D}" -name '*.la' -delete || die
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe restrict removal to regular files, i.e. add "-type f"?
>>>>
>>>> I suppose you should have spoken up when people started adopting that
>>>> 'find' line all over the place.  Though I honestly doubt we're going to
>>>> see many packages installing '*.la' non-files.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Just so we are all clear here: your argument is that more fully correct
>>> approaches should not be considered in the present and future because
>>> less fully correct approaches were implemented in the past? And,
>>> further, that since nothing matching a specific pattern happens to come
>>> to your mind at he moment, such things do not exist? Perhaps dialing
>>> back the rhetoric from 11 and considering feedback as an opportunity to
>>> improve existing code is called for in this case, among others.
>>
>> I think you might be reading more into this than was intended.
>>
>> I read his email as lamenting that the horse has left the barn, so to
>> speak. There are already hundreds of uses of find -name '*.la' -delete
>> without -type f in the tree, probably in large part because
>> ltprune.eclass suggests the form without it.
>>
>> Suggesting dialing down the rhetoric when it appears that you have
>> overreacted is a bit humorous.
>>
> 
> He simply decided to stalk me and issue ad hominem attacks whenever he
> can.  It's how professionals in Gentoo react to critique.
> 
I am hardly "stalking" you. I am addressing bad ideas and poor
maintainer behavior, that it happens to be yours is immaterial to me.
Besides, you effectively demanded that I participate more broadly[1], so
do kindly pick one sort of libel and stick to it. As contradicting
yourself not only weakens your argument (were it to have a basis to
begin with), it makes malicious intent more obvious.

As for ad hominem attacks, do kindly present examples, I would be most
interested in any which you can demonstrate are unjustified. When I ask
if/how/why your behavior is acceptable for someone in your roles, I am
seriously asking that question. I want to know the rationale, especially
under what are, at least nominally, the rules governing the interactions
and behaviors which I am inquiring about. Though I will forego linking
to that, as that evidently annoys you.

[1]
https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/message/b498bcfaf34ffc355eaba3afafd1ee96

Reply via email to