Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Maxim Koltsov <maksbotan@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC]flag-o-matic.eclass strip-flags change to support prefix
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2012 15:04:45
Message-Id: CAB_KkxxHZqG1dF=EZrm4U6y_zkqjwVZ0_vSTM4Xoz=vbSXKRKg@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC]flag-o-matic.eclass strip-flags change to support prefix by Justin
2012/6/17 Justin <jlec@g.o>:
> On 17.06.2012 15:23, Maxim Koltsov wrote: >> 2012/6/17 Justin <jlec@g.o>: >>> On 17.06.2012 14:13, Maxim Koltsov wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> During prefix bootstrap i noticed that strip-flags removes -L and -I >>>> flags from *FLAGS while these flags are essential for prefix >>>> bootstrapping. Therefore i propose a fix for strip-flags function to >>> >>> Is this really necessary? I never experienced any problems which need >>> this when following the guides. I looks like a hack, because something >>> else is borked. >> >> I've just hit binutils on OpenBSD not finding libdl.so installed in >> $EPREFIX/usr/lib/ because of this. >> Don't tell me that OpenBSD prefix is unsupported, i'm working on >> getting it supported. >> > > I am still not convinced. libdl.so is provided by glibc, at least on my > linux system. And glibc is one of the rare packages which needs to be > provided by the host system instead of being installed in the prefix. > > Is there something different on BSD which makes libdl.so appear inside > the prefix?
At least on OpenBSD dlopen() is not in libdl.so, but in ld.so itself, so I have to install dummy libdl.so to ${EPREFIX}/usr/lib. I think we should use Fabian's solution from the bug, if it does not cause any unwanted consequences.

Replies