| 1 |
On Sun, Nov 03, 2019 at 12:18:40PM -0800, Zac Medico wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 11/3/19 11:53 AM, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Sun, 2019-11-03 at 11:49 -0800, Zac Medico wrote: |
| 4 |
> >> On 10/27/19 10:40 AM, William Hubbs wrote: |
| 5 |
> >>> Most upstreams and build systems do not make this distinction, so this |
| 6 |
> >>> causes unnecessary hacks in ebuilds. |
| 7 |
> >>> |
| 8 |
> >>> Signed-off-by: William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> |
| 9 |
> >>> --- |
| 10 |
> >>> bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries | 10 ---------- |
| 11 |
> >>> 1 file changed, 10 deletions(-) |
| 12 |
> >>> |
| 13 |
> >>> diff --git a/bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries b/bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries |
| 14 |
> >>> index d1d2c4fdd..e59369bf6 100644 |
| 15 |
> >>> --- a/bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries |
| 16 |
> >>> +++ b/bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries |
| 17 |
> >>> @@ -152,16 +152,6 @@ lib_check() { |
| 18 |
> >>> done |
| 19 |
> >>> [[ ${abort} == "yes" ]] && die "add those ldscripts" |
| 20 |
> >>> |
| 21 |
> >>> - # Make sure people don't store libtool files or static libs in /lib |
| 22 |
> >>> - f=$(ls "${ED%/}"/lib*/*.{a,la} 2>/dev/null) |
| 23 |
> >>> - if [[ -n ${f} ]] ; then |
| 24 |
> >>> - __vecho -ne '\n' |
| 25 |
> >>> - eqawarn "QA Notice: Excessive files found in the / partition" |
| 26 |
> >>> - eqawarn "${f}" |
| 27 |
> >>> - __vecho -ne '\n' |
| 28 |
> >>> - die "static archives (*.a) and libtool library files (*.la) belong in /usr/lib*, not /lib*" |
| 29 |
> >>> - fi |
| 30 |
> >>> - |
| 31 |
> >>> # Verify that the libtool files don't contain bogus $D entries. |
| 32 |
> >>> local abort=no gentoo_bug=no always_overflow=no |
| 33 |
> >>> for a in "${ED%/}"/usr/lib*/*.la ; do |
| 34 |
> >>> |
| 35 |
> >> |
| 36 |
> >> Merged. Thanks! |
| 37 |
> >> |
| 38 |
> >> https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/portage.git/commit/?id=498900e5e51460502d8271f409a4c614a021613b |
| 39 |
> >> |
| 40 |
> > |
| 41 |
> > Please revert this. I should point out that this has been vetoed |
| 42 |
> > by a QA member, and is currently subject to QA vote. Therefore, I |
| 43 |
> > believe you shouldn't be making rash decisions based on patches |
| 44 |
> > submitted by a single developer. Especially given that so far nobody |
| 45 |
> > else has voiced his opinion either way, so it's 1:1. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
You being a qa member doesn't have a lot to do with this mgorny. you |
| 48 |
know there was no official policy when I posted this, and as far as I |
| 49 |
know there is not one now. |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
William |
Archives