13.10.2016 16:53, Ulrich Mueller пишет:
> Hi all,
>
> I suggest that we ban the dolib and libopts commands in EAPI 7.
>
> Rationale:
> 1. There are about 60 instances of dolib in the tree. At least one
>third of them appears to be wrong (e.g., should be replaced by
>dolib.so for correct m
On Do, 2016-10-13 at 15:53 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I suggest that we ban the dolib and libopts commands in EAPI 7.
>
> Rationale:
> 1. There are about 60 instances of dolib in the tree. At least one
> third of them appears to be wrong (e.g., should be replaced by
> dolib.
On 10/13/2016 06:53 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I suggest that we ban the dolib and libopts commands in EAPI 7.
>
> Rationale:
> 1. There are about 60 instances of dolib in the tree. At least one
>third of them appears to be wrong (e.g., should be replaced by
>dolib.so for cor
On 13/10/16 15:04, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Oct 2016 15:53:16 +0200
> Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I suggest that we ban the dolib and libopts commands in EAPI 7.
>>
>> Rationale:
>> 1. There are about 60 instances of dolib in the tree. At least one
>>third of them appears
On Thu, 13 Oct 2016 15:53:16 +0200
Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I suggest that we ban the dolib and libopts commands in EAPI 7.
>
> Rationale:
> 1. There are about 60 instances of dolib in the tree. At least one
>third of them appears to be wrong (e.g., should be replaced by
>dol
