From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Ohtej-0001ju-Sn for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 08 Aug 2010 00:22:26 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 47211E0967; Sun, 8 Aug 2010 00:22:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ww0-f53.google.com (mail-ww0-f53.google.com [74.125.82.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D43CE094B for ; Sun, 8 Aug 2010 00:22:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wwb22 with SMTP id 22so1010936wwb.10 for ; Sat, 07 Aug 2010 17:22:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:subject:from:to:cc :in-reply-to:references:content-type:date:message-id:mime-version :x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding; bh=HuTGDcZFxwkKf5dXFV3xDCqA/RuXUWDvT4dPwrOHtDk=; b=nrt+gEt6KooB4hJAKXPQIzDhWE8hAZvGCu+4lPWixWSwdipUSyF3ywzCmTDnnnfsH+ WCjt/mJY1TQewDaGQVTqoc+Cf73b1T6uHD3gfeDetklzTNNQR/4tLWiaZfIXRjkxdcLx au9syAXR/aVVei80pMbZMYqW+YnrCbHKFHD/U= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:from:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date :message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding; b=ZHjvUTPPCfMmmj6w6xo7fKOnH2+gqMGAFww96VOQB56Wq1ekDTN+yNmiLMGEXKSdKz nzc2h41UPADceCVWTvXAQB/OIFdvAAb+3gNwc30EbMxAwsLwcunsilLV9LJ+PFmU8L+6 oiQATTBfny+6XDfvpDJ/gjSQJCJ9IgqSVtd4E= Received: by 10.227.144.4 with SMTP id x4mr12243142wbu.59.1281226936840; Sat, 07 Aug 2010 17:22:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.28.64.73] (host249-252-static.95-94-b.business.telecomitalia.it [94.95.252.249]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id h3sm2785784wbb.15.2010.08.07.17.22.15 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sat, 07 Aug 2010 17:22:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Add --hash-style=gnu to LDFLAGS From: Diego Elio =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Petten=F2?= To: Alec Warner Cc: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org, Mike Frysinger , qa@gentoo.org In-Reply-To: References: <20100807163230.GA31575@Mystical> <201008071732.43567.vapier@gentoo.org> <20100808001142.GA7077@Mystical> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2010 02:22:21 +0200 Message-ID: <1281226941.2511.3.camel@saladin.local> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: b90da441-8dfd-4793-893a-927fe357154c X-Archives-Hash: 526f5688213c67608542251c9c011bf0 Il giorno sab, 07/08/2010 alle 17.15 -0700, Alec Warner ha scritto: >=20 > Why not just set some LDFLAGS that totally won't work (-Wl, taters) > and then assume anything that actually compiles with those flags set > does not respect LDFLAGS. Set that up on a tinderbox instead of > making users do it.=20 Because such negative tests don't get far away: a single package failing will drop its whole deptree from merging. And we have much more important things to look for with a tinderbox than this, given the amount of (failure) builds you'd be expected to see with this approach. --=20 Diego Elio Petten=C3=B2 =E2=80=94 Flameeyes http://blog.flameeyes.eu/