| 1 |
On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 18:36:28 +0200 |
| 2 |
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis <arfrever.fta@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> I would like to suggest new policy stating that packages should |
| 5 |
> respect LDFLAGS. Small amount of packages which ignore LDFLAGS should |
| 6 |
> be patched to respect them. Such patches are usually small and easy |
| 7 |
> to write. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> This policy is required to allow QA team to fix packages which ignore |
| 10 |
> LDFLAGS. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Um, this already is the policy. We've always fixed bug reports about |
| 13 |
LDFLAGS being ignored. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
-- |
| 17 |
gcc-porting, by design, by neglect |
| 18 |
treecleaner, for a fact or just for effect |
| 19 |
wxwidgets @ gentoo EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662 |
Archives