Il giorno sab, 02/10/2010 alle 00.42 +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan ha scritto:
Right, so a few weeks later when they re-merge a binpkg, they suddenly
get build failures again. And that confuses them since it's
unexpected. This is in general a bad experience for stable users who
want to get work done, not baby-sit their system.
Seriously, how many times do you re-install packages out of binpkgs on a
_build_ system? I'll be honest: for me it's never. I reinstall them
often on a _production_ system, but there, I mostly have INSTALL_MASK
on .la files because _I don't build on those_. And in that situation,
there is no breakage to begin with.
Having said that, I was informed off-list that this is not meant to be
*the* solution for la file removal breakage, but merely an informative
notice to raise awareness for the (oft-useful) hammer that is
lafilefixer.
Which is going to cover their bases. *The* solution is to keep removing
(in ~arch) everything else, and get it merged back into stable with
time, which means that anything introduced _now_ should be stabled not
before Portage 2.1.9.x is stabled, or can be a security stable; in that
case users with lafilefixer set up will not even see it happening.
I'm sorry, but I do not understand your hostility. Could you rephrase
your objections with what I said in a way I can understand so that I
can address them?
I'm pretty sure I did that before, otherwise you might ask Remi, as he
probably have more patience than me on the matter and is up-to-date with
the situation last I knew.
--
Diego Elio Pettenò — “Flameeyes”
http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
If you found a .asc file in this mail and know not what it is,
it's a GnuPG digital signature: http://www.gnupg.org/
