1 |
On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 00:40 +0200, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: |
2 |
> Hi all users, |
3 |
> |
4 |
> Secondly, you can avoid any future requirement for this by sanitising |
5 |
> the newly installed .la files; this can be done either by using the |
6 |
> (currently testing) Portage 2.1.9 series, or by adding the following |
7 |
> snippet to your /etc/portage/bashrc: |
8 |
> |
9 |
> post_src_install() { |
10 |
> lafilefixer "${D}" |
11 |
> } |
12 |
> |
13 |
|
14 |
|
15 |
A question I cant see answered anywhere though its been asked: |
16 |
|
17 |
What are the implications of adding this "snippet" - will it come back |
18 |
to bite us (users) when the next version of portage comes along? |
19 |
|
20 |
|
21 |
and in addition: |
22 |
- none of my systems have a /etc/portage/bashrc so Ive created them, but |
23 |
should they be executable, have a hash-bang line, ... ? |
24 |
|
25 |
- will this snippet fix the problems with "equery check" marking |
26 |
libraries as broken after lafilefixer is run? (I presume an emerge -e |
27 |
world will be needed to update the database ...) |
28 |
|
29 |
BillK |