[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: |
Sat, 10 Aug 2024 11:31:32 +0000 |
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32003
--- Comment #28 from Luca Boccassi <bluca at debian dot org> ---
As user and owner of the spec, I am fine with any of those options. A slight
preference for a new command line (option A), as that means you don't need to
worry about version matching - if the new flag is there, then you can pass
encoded input, if it's not, then you know it only takes unencoded input. But
not a strong preference.
--
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, bdrung at posteo dot de, 2024/08/09
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, bluca at debian dot org, 2024/08/09
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, bdrung at posteo dot de, 2024/08/09
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, bluca at debian dot org, 2024/08/09
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, bdrung at posteo dot de, 2024/08/09
- [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, dilfridge at gentoo dot org, 2024/08/10
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, hjl.tools at gmail dot com, 2024/08/10
- [Bug ld/32003] Specifying --package-metadata might not be possible and is too fragile, bdrung at posteo dot de, 2024/08/12