Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Andrew Savchenko <bircoph@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH 2/3] xorg-2.eclass: Remove use of prune_libtool_files
Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2019 08:42:47
Message-Id: 20190223114236.725b453bdcb03e813507df45@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH 2/3] xorg-2.eclass: Remove use of prune_libtool_files by desultory
1 On Fri, 22 Feb 2019 23:30:15 -0500 desultory wrote:
2 > On 02/20/19 02:36, Michał Górny wrote:
3 > > On Wed, 2019-02-20 at 07:20 +0100, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
4 > >>>>>>> On Wed, 20 Feb 2019, Matt Turner wrote:
5 > >>
6 > >>
7 > >>> # Don't install libtool archives (even for modules)
8 > >>> - prune_libtool_files --all
9 > >>> + find "${D}" -name '*.la' -delete || die
10 > >>
11 > >> Maybe restrict removal to regular files, i.e. add "-type f"?
12 > >
13 > > I suppose you should have spoken up when people started adopting that
14 > > 'find' line all over the place. Though I honestly doubt we're going to
15 > > see many packages installing '*.la' non-files.
16 > >
17 > Just so we are all clear here: your argument is that more fully correct
18 > approaches should not be considered in the present and future because
19 > less fully correct approaches were implemented in the past? And,
20 > further, that since nothing matching a specific pattern happens to come
21 > to your mind at he moment, such things do not exist? Perhaps dialing
22 > back the rhetoric from 11 and considering feedback as an opportunity to
23 > improve existing code is called for in this case, among others.
24
25 If we are going to improve code, we should also use find -O3.
26
27
28 Best regards,
29 Andrew Savchenko

Replies