and my bad. I am not yet awake.
It died cause of runpaths on strict, it just showed both, and I wasn't thinking when I sent earlier email... On 12/26/05, Dan Meltzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 12/26/05, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Monday 26 December 2005 13:59, Simon Stelling wrote: > > > > Actually "stricter", and there are way too many people to put that in > > > > without knowing what that do... or is it a default nowadays, I'm not > > > > even > > > > sure. > > > You're mixing up 'strict' with 'stricter'. > > Well if I'm mixing up, someone moved the QA checks from stricter to strict > > lately ;) > > I don't run strict as I usually have modified ebuilds if I'm working on > > them; > > I don't run stricter as lot of packages that fails are not mine, I usually > > use it only when I'm testing my packages or my changes. > > strict is in make.defaults... > This causes packages with executable stacks to die, and fairly > arbitrarily imo (with portage 2.1_pre2 that is) (see bug 116611). > > IMUO, portage should never die when an issue of questionable merit > comes up and features are simply those set by default. > > > > > > -- > > Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/ > > Gentoo/ALT lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, AMD64, Sound, PAM, KDE > > > > > > > -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
