On Sun, 2019-03-03 at 20:29 +0100, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, 02 Mar 2019, Michał Górny wrote: > > On Sat, 2019-03-02 at 16:59 -0500, Mike Gilbert wrote: > > > Perhaps we should un-ban the ltprune eclass for EAPI 7? > > > > > > It seems like it would still be useful to have a way of detecting > > > libtool-archives instead of removing any file that ends with ".la". > > How many valid cases for this are there? For comparison, how many > > useless complexity will be added to ebuilds by thoughtless maintainers > > using the first thing that seems to work without actually verifying > > whether it is necessary? > > Removing code that is working perfectly fine (at least, I don't see any > open bug for ltprune.eclass) doesn't look like the right instrument to > inform maintainers about a potential QA issue. After all, the eclass has > a warning in its description that is hard to miss.
Actually, the code sometimes left .la files that weren't really needed after all. Then people either replaced it with oneliner, or used ' --all' which made it equivalent with the oneliner. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
