[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and i
From: |
bluca at debian dot org |
Subject: |
[Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile |
Date: |
Tue, 23 Jul 2024 22:40:03 +0000 |
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32003
--- Comment #10 from Luca Boccassi <bluca at debian dot org> ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #9)
> For non-working --package-metadata, we should either remove it or fix it.
Sorry, but this is absolutely wrong, as the existing option works just fine. I
do not mind if you add other options, but the existing one cannot be removed,
as it is in active use in production, and it will remain in active use in
production for the foreseeable future - I have no intention nor plan of
stopping its use, even if there are alternatives. It works just fine either
directly with some escaping, or indirectly via a spec file. Again, no problem
with adding alternative options if you want to have them, absolutely fine to do
so, but just not at the expense of the current one.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, (continued)
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, hjl.tools at gmail dot com, 2024/07/22
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, hjl.tools at gmail dot com, 2024/07/22
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, hjl.tools at gmail dot com, 2024/07/22
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, hjl.tools at gmail dot com, 2024/07/23
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, jbeulich at suse dot com, 2024/07/23
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, hjl.tools at gmail dot com, 2024/07/23
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, bdrung at posteo dot de, 2024/07/23
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, hjl.tools at gmail dot com, 2024/07/23
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, bdrung at posteo dot de, 2024/07/23
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, hjl.tools at gmail dot com, 2024/07/23
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile,
bluca at debian dot org <=
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, bdrung at posteo dot de, 2024/07/23
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, hjl.tools at gmail dot com, 2024/07/23
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, bdrung at posteo dot de, 2024/07/23
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, hjl.tools at gmail dot com, 2024/07/23
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, jbeulich at suse dot com, 2024/07/24
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, jbeulich at suse dot com, 2024/07/24
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, hjl.tools at gmail dot com, 2024/07/24
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, hjl.tools at gmail dot com, 2024/07/24
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, sam at gentoo dot org, 2024/07/24
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, dilfridge at gentoo dot org, 2024/07/24