Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists. c.f. bug 424647
Petteri Räty posted on Tue, 27 Jul 2010 20:32:07 +0300 as excerpted:
>>> On 7/27/10 7:39 AM, Jeroen Roovers wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Is it time yet? I still find a lot of packages that do not even
>>>> respect LDFLAGS yet - when all these get fixed to respect LDFLAGS, we
>>>> will probably find yet more packages that are problematic with
>>>> --as-needed.
> But adding --as-needed by default does not (now) break packages not
> respecting LDFLAGS.
This is, I think, the main point. Ignoring LDFLAGS doesn't need to delay
a change in the default LDFLAGS because they aren't seen in that case
anyway so the package is no more broken than before. Both ignoring the
flags entirely and breaking with this specific flag are bugs, but they're
separate bugs and can be treated separately.
--
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
|
|
