On Thu, 31 Jan 2013 00:53:06 +0100 Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 17:57:20 -0600 > Ryan Hill <dirtye...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 22:36:53 +0100 > > Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > Currently, epunt_cxx always succeeds. This results in some > > > of the ebuilds keeping its use even though the C++ checks were removed > > > upstream. > > > > > > Therefore, I'm suggesting to add a simple check to the function -- if > > > none of the patching attempts succeed, die requesting the user to remove > > > the invocation. > > > > eqawarn? > > Yes, eqawarn if we don't want users to be hurt :P. I think it would be overkill to make what is essentially a no-op into a fatal error. A warning would be appropriate. -- gcc-porting toolchain, wxwidgets learn a language baby, it's that kind of place @ gentoo.org where low card is hunger and high card is taste
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
