On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 7:41 PM, Luca Barbato <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On 10/02/2010 06:26 PM, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
>> My opinions haven't changed one bit in the past week. I don't see how
>> not breaking the stable tree can be called being "overly
> you have a quite broad definition of "breaking".
> - clean slate emerge works before and after.
> - adding a suggestion to use either the .la fixer scripts or revdep-rebuild
> should be enough to have the system in a working state.
> - the rough solution of removing all the .la files in the system works for
> most use cases (that's my local solution)
Okay, so you're saying that "it works fine in these specific cases,
and if it doesn't, then you can fix it by doing XYZ". I would use that
attitude with the unstable tree, not the stable tree.
> So it isn't an earth shattering change like a nonfunctional libc in the
> stable tree or a broken version of coreutils, please keep a bit of
If half of QA team is so adamant in saying that this isn't an issue, I
guess I'll just have to shut up.