On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 10:56:57PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Thursday 20 October 2005 10:49 pm, Dan Meltzer wrote: > > Why single out this one? ones system will not break irreperbly > > without a cxx compiler, it'll just cause a another recompile to get it > > to work after breakage if the person is using -* (which has already > > been said to be hackish and ill-advised, so doom on them! > > it will actually > > if you build gcc w/out C++ support that means no libstdc++ > > no libstdc++ means python on most boxes is now broken > > no python means no emerge > > how exactly are you going to re-emerge gcc then ? oh, you cant ... > -mike
It could be handled the same way busybox handles USE=make-symlinks: simply abort unless the user makes it really clear via an extra variable that he knows what he's doing. A nocxx flag isn't necessary to protect users. : >>> Test phase [not enabled]: sys-apps/busybox-1.01 : : >>> Install busybox-1.01 into /var/tmp/portage/busybox-1.01/image/ category sys-apps : * setting USE=make-symlinks and emerging to / is very dangerous. : * it WILL overwrite lots of system programs like: ls bash awk grep (bug 60805 for full list). : * If you are creating a binary only and not merging this is probably ok. : * set env VERY_BRAVE_OR_VERY_DUMB=yes if this is realy what you want. : : !!! ERROR: sys-apps/busybox-1.01 failed. : !!! Function src_install, Line 176, Exitcode 0 : !!! silly options will destroy your system : !!! If you need support, post the topmost build error, NOT this status message.
pgpivGcvFDvuY.pgp
Description: PGP signature
