[gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH/RFC] eclass/flag-o-matic.eclass: prepend-ldpath

[Gregory M. Turner]

My god, I am a horrible self-editor.  Sorry.  Please ignore the magnum 
opus above and allow me to try again.

In dev-lang/python*, we use

   append-ldflags '-L.'

to ensure linking is performed against the built libpython.so in-tree, 
rather than than in the one in $(libdir).  But, this doesn't work if 
LDFLAGS contains "-L$(libdir)".

We could try to fix this like:

  export LDFLAGS="-L. ${LDFLAGS}"

or so.  That would cover 99.9% of the cases out there.  But very rarely, 
indiscriminately placing our '-L.' before every other clause in LDFLAGS 
might cause an unanticipated side-effect.

The flag-o-matic patch in my previous post analyses LDPATH and finds the 
first statement that might possibly cause the ld command-line 
library-search-path to be impacted, and inserts the "-L." just before 
that statement, hopefully achieving the desired result with the least 
possible side-effects.

I wonder: do people feel this distinction is meaningful enough to 
justify actually making it?  Or am I just being an anal-retentive nut-job?

If you tried to read my first post, thanks for not offing yourself like 
the guys who get stuck sitting next to Ted Striker in _Airplane!_

-gmt