Hi again, On 2026-04-27 at 17:30+02:00, Hugo Buddelmeijer wrote: > On 27/4/26 16:38, Gabriel Wicki wrote: > > Starting this is not much more than introducing errors (and the relevant > > messages) in the substitute* function, pushing these changes to a > > branch, asking QA to start building and investigating, no? > > > > But to be a bit more on the issue: if a substitute* call fails for > > either not finding a file or not being able to match the regex, the > > solution is to delete that call. > > The solution would be to investigate whether the now-failing > substitution is still necessary or not; that investigation is not > necessarily quick and easy.
I wanna add that deleting that call would not affect the status quo, thus the solution can simply be doing that plus filing a bug report to be fixed later. Cheers, Phong
