| 1 |
Fabian Groffen wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 03-10-2009 22:35:58 +0300, Samuli Suominen wrote: |
| 3 |
>> Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> On Sat, 03 Oct 2009 22:13:59 +0300 |
| 5 |
>>> Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@g.o> wrote: |
| 6 |
>>>> Since new binutils will support LD_AS_NEEDED="1" to force ld behave |
| 7 |
>>>> asneeded we could use this for the developer -target in profiles? |
| 8 |
>>>> |
| 9 |
>>>> Speak up if you think it's a terrible idea. |
| 10 |
>>> Well, it does break correct code, so it's about on par with forcing |
| 11 |
>>> -ffast-math or -fno-exceptions or -fvisibility-inlines-hidden on |
| 12 |
>>> globally... |
| 13 |
>>> |
| 14 |
>> Be reasonable. We can add -Wl,--no-as-needed for those packages with |
| 15 |
>> valid code. And I'm certainly not suggesting adding it to base/, _only_ |
| 16 |
>> for the developer target. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> Please recall that this is a GNU binutils flag. I prefer the |
| 19 |
> environment flag over the command-line option, because it doesn't break |
| 20 |
> other linkers, but if it implies many ebuilds getting -Wl,--no-as-needed |
| 21 |
> append-ldflagged, then I'm not getting happy as that breaks my builds. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
The amount of pkgs in tree with valid code that fails with asneeded is |
| 26 |
close to zero. We can use this, |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
if use userland_GNU; then |
| 29 |
append-ldflags -Wl,--no-as-needed |
| 30 |
fi |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
logic so it won't cause you troubles. Or the obvious shorter && version |
| 33 |
of it. |
Archives