Re: [gentoo-catalyst] [PATCH v2] stage1-controller.sh: Remove some old poor cleaning code

["Rick \"Zero_Chaos\" Farina" <zerochaos@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1496 bytes --]

On 09/09/2014 02:38 PM, Brian Dolbec wrote:
> On Mon,  1 Sep 2014 22:05:45 -0700
> Brian Dolbec <dolsen@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
>> This code had portage bin path hard coded.  That path needed to be
>> changed for a new portage ebuild and install system.
>> After testing the origianl code and comparing it with some updated
>> code supplied by Douglas Freed.  It turned out both code chunks
>> resulted in nothing being cleaned.
>>
>> Tested and confirmed by zero_chaos.
> 
> I have gone over things more and tested the new find command. It does
> work on my host system.  However, the question remains... DOES this
> particular cleaning operation NEED to be performed?
> 
> With current the tree snapshot for my testing 20140829.  It does not
> find anything to clean.  BUT, will that remain the same in the future
> as pkgs are bumped?
> 
> For safety, I'd be inclined to keep the find command (v1 of the
> patch) and clean any it does find just in case.
> 

If we truly need to remove these files, I don't think catalyst was ever
the place to do this.  We have USE=static and USE=static-libs for a
reason.  Randomly removing files from the filesystem was a hack then,
and if we are cleaning this up let's just remove it.  If I want to build
things with USE=static or USE=static-libs then catalyst shouldn't be
pointlessly crippling my builds.

v2 means one less horrible hack in catalyst, and one at a time is the
only way will remove all the horror.

-Zero


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 884 bytes --]