| 1 |
On Tue, 2009-04-21 at 16:17 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Tue, 21 Apr 2009 05:11:15 +0300 |
| 3 |
> Mart Raudsepp <leio@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> > > * ECONF-OPTIONS |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > query |
| 7 |
> > --disable-dependency-tracking has other implications than it being |
| 8 |
> > allowed to be passed to ./configure or not - such as dependency |
| 9 |
> > tracking being, well, disabled and the affects of that in face of any |
| 10 |
> > outside influences to headers used by it from the system, when |
| 11 |
> > compared to the case when dependency tracking is enabled. Such as |
| 12 |
> > when a separate (possibly parallel) install step kicks in. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> If a parallel install is overwriting things on / whilst a package is |
| 15 |
> compiling, things are already horribly broken regardless of this |
| 16 |
> switch. PMS explicitly forbids that from happening. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
That's that. And then there's the real world. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
> > Olivier Crête also has an outstanding comment about a maintainer |
| 21 |
> > possibly not wanting that disabled in case of patches applied. Could |
| 22 |
> > use some elaboration on that thought, or comments in replies. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> It's always possible to override it if necessary. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
No. It is possible to not use econf and write all of the options it's |
| 27 |
supposed to be passing manually. Probably missing something or otherwise |
| 28 |
being horribly long. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
> > --enable-fast-install is completely new to me for consideration under |
| 31 |
> > EAPI-3. Maybe I just missed it when reading PMS draft before, and it |
| 32 |
> > wasn't listed in the other summaries. |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
> No, it's been there all along. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Ok. That doesn't change it's complete pointlessness to be there. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
Anyway, |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
"whatever" on --disable-dependency-tracking |
| 42 |
Definitely _no_ on --enable-fast-install. It is already the default and |
| 43 |
when it isn't (I know of no such cases), upstream maintainer has |
| 44 |
_explicitly_ made it so. It is not our business to be passing the |
| 45 |
libtool specific default argument. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
-- |
| 49 |
Mart Raudsepp |
| 50 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 51 |
Mail: leio@g.o |
| 52 |
Weblog: http://planet.gentoo.org/developers/leio |
Archives