| 1 |
On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 17:57:20 -0600 |
| 2 |
Ryan Hill <dirtyepic@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 22:36:53 +0100 |
| 5 |
> Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> > Currently, epunt_cxx always succeeds. This results in some |
| 8 |
> > of the ebuilds keeping its use even though the C++ checks were removed |
| 9 |
> > upstream. |
| 10 |
> > |
| 11 |
> > Therefore, I'm suggesting to add a simple check to the function -- if |
| 12 |
> > none of the patching attempts succeed, die requesting the user to remove |
| 13 |
> > the invocation. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> eqawarn? |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Yes, eqawarn if we don't want users to be hurt :P. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
-- |
| 20 |
Best regards, |
| 21 |
Michał Górny |
Archives