| 1 |
On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 10:56:57PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Thursday 20 October 2005 10:49 pm, Dan Meltzer wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Why single out this one? ones system will not break irreperbly |
| 4 |
> > without a cxx compiler, it'll just cause a another recompile to get it |
| 5 |
> > to work after breakage if the person is using -* (which has already |
| 6 |
> > been said to be hackish and ill-advised, so doom on them! |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> it will actually |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> if you build gcc w/out C++ support that means no libstdc++ |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> no libstdc++ means python on most boxes is now broken |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> no python means no emerge |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> how exactly are you going to re-emerge gcc then ? oh, you cant ... |
| 17 |
> -mike |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
It could be handled the same way busybox handles USE=make-symlinks: |
| 20 |
simply abort unless the user makes it really clear via an extra variable |
| 21 |
that he knows what he's doing. A nocxx flag isn't necessary to protect |
| 22 |
users. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
: >>> Test phase [not enabled]: sys-apps/busybox-1.01 |
| 25 |
: |
| 26 |
: >>> Install busybox-1.01 into /var/tmp/portage/busybox-1.01/image/ category sys-apps |
| 27 |
: * setting USE=make-symlinks and emerging to / is very dangerous. |
| 28 |
: * it WILL overwrite lots of system programs like: ls bash awk grep (bug 60805 for full list). |
| 29 |
: * If you are creating a binary only and not merging this is probably ok. |
| 30 |
: * set env VERY_BRAVE_OR_VERY_DUMB=yes if this is realy what you want. |
| 31 |
: |
| 32 |
: !!! ERROR: sys-apps/busybox-1.01 failed. |
| 33 |
: !!! Function src_install, Line 176, Exitcode 0 |
| 34 |
: !!! silly options will destroy your system |
| 35 |
: !!! If you need support, post the topmost build error, NOT this status message. |
Archives