| 1 |
On Mon, 1 Sep 2014 22:05:45 -0700 |
| 2 |
Brian Dolbec <dolsen@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> This code had portage bin path hard coded. That path needed to be |
| 5 |
> changed for a new portage ebuild and install system. |
| 6 |
> After testing the origianl code and comparing it with some updated |
| 7 |
> code supplied by Douglas Freed. It turned out both code chunks |
| 8 |
> resulted in nothing being cleaned. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Tested and confirmed by zero_chaos. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
I have gone over things more and tested the new find command. It does |
| 13 |
work on my host system. However, the question remains... DOES this |
| 14 |
particular cleaning operation NEED to be performed? |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
With current the tree snapshot for my testing 20140829. It does not |
| 17 |
find anything to clean. BUT, will that remain the same in the future |
| 18 |
as pkgs are bumped? |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
For safety, I'd be inclined to keep the find command (v1 of the |
| 21 |
patch) and clean any it does find just in case. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
Brian Dolbec <dolsen> |
Archives