* [gentoo-dev] [PATCH eutils] Die if epunt_cxx is called unnecessarily.
@ 2013-01-30 21:36 Michał Górny
2013-01-30 23:57 ` [gentoo-dev] " Ryan Hill
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Michał Górny @ 2013-01-30 21:36 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev; +Cc: Michał Górny
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.
---
gx86/eclass/eutils.eclass | 8 ++++++--
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gx86/eclass/eutils.eclass b/gx86/eclass/eutils.eclass
index 6588792..9d77389 100644
--- a/gx86/eclass/eutils.eclass
+++ b/gx86/eclass/eutils.eclass
@@ -1269,10 +1269,14 @@ epunt_cxx() {
local dir=$1
[[ -z ${dir} ]] && dir=${S}
ebegin "Removing useless C++ checks"
- local f
+ local f any_found
find "${dir}" -name configure | while read f ; do
- patch --no-backup-if-mismatch -p0 "${f}" "${PORTDIR}/eclass/ELT-patches/nocxx/nocxx.patch" > /dev/null
+ patch --no-backup-if-mismatch -p0 "${f}" \
+ "${PORTDIR}/eclass/ELT-patches/nocxx/nocxx.patch" > /dev/null \
+ && any_found=1
done
+
+ [[ -n ${any_found} ]] || die "No C++ checks to punt."
eend 0
}
--
1.8.1.2
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH eutils] Die if epunt_cxx is called unnecessarily.
2013-01-30 23:57 ` [gentoo-dev] " Ryan Hill
@ 2013-01-30 23:53 ` Michał Górny
2013-01-31 0:17 ` Ryan Hill
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Michał Górny @ 2013-01-30 23:53 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev; +Cc: dirtyepic
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 609 bytes --]
On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 17:57:20 -0600
Ryan Hill <dirtyepic@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 22:36:53 +0100
> Michał Górny <mgorny@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.
--
Best regards,
Michał Górny
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 316 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH eutils] Die if epunt_cxx is called unnecessarily.
2013-01-30 21:36 [gentoo-dev] [PATCH eutils] Die if epunt_cxx is called unnecessarily Michał Górny
@ 2013-01-30 23:57 ` Ryan Hill
2013-01-30 23:53 ` Michał Górny
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Ryan Hill @ 2013-01-30 23:57 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 596 bytes --]
On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 22:36:53 +0100
Michał Górny <mgorny@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?
--
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
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH eutils] Die if epunt_cxx is called unnecessarily.
2013-01-30 23:53 ` Michał Górny
@ 2013-01-31 0:17 ` Ryan Hill
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Ryan Hill @ 2013-01-31 0:17 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 984 bytes --]
On Thu, 31 Jan 2013 00:53:06 +0100
Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 17:57:20 -0600
> Ryan Hill <dirtyepic@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 22:36:53 +0100
> > Michał Górny <mgorny@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
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-01-31 0:07 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-01-30 21:36 [gentoo-dev] [PATCH eutils] Die if epunt_cxx is called unnecessarily Michał Górny
2013-01-30 23:57 ` [gentoo-dev] " Ryan Hill
2013-01-30 23:53 ` Michał Górny
2013-01-31 0:17 ` Ryan Hill
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox