Archives
Archives
| From: | William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-portage-dev@l.g.o | ||
| Cc: | floppym@g.o, soap@g.o | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] install-qa-check.d: remove check that bans libtool files and static libs from / | ||
| Date: | Sun, 03 Nov 2019 19:22:59 | ||
| Message-Id: | 20191103192254.GA28416@linux1.home | ||
| In Reply to: | [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] install-qa-check.d: remove check that bans libtool files and static libs from / by William Hubbs |
||
| 1 | On Sun, Oct 27, 2019 at 12:40:07PM -0500, William Hubbs wrote: |
| 2 | > Most upstreams and build systems do not make this distinction, so this |
| 3 | > causes unnecessary hacks in ebuilds. |
| 4 | |
| 5 | I spoke with the qa lead about this as you suggested, and he doesn't |
| 6 | feel that he needs to ack this from a qa standpoint. |
| 7 | |
| 8 | He agrees with me that there isn't an official qa policy keeping this in |
| 9 | place. |
| 10 | |
| 11 | So, we are back to this being a portage issue. |
| 12 | |
| 13 | Thanks, |
| 14 | |
| 15 | William |
| File name | MIME type |
|---|---|
| signature.asc | application/pgp-signature |