| 1 |
On Thursday 06 of September 2012 10:18:34 Brian Harring wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Mon, Sep 03, 2012 at 10:54:15PM +0200, Maciej Mrozowski wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Tuesday 28 of August 2012 02:15:40 hasufell wrote: |
| 4 |
> > > Is there a reason not to support static-libs in an ebuild if the |
| 5 |
> > > package supports it? |
| 6 |
> > > |
| 7 |
> > > It seems some developers don't care about this option. What's the |
| 8 |
> > > gentoo policy on this? Isn't this actually a bug? |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > A little remark. |
| 11 |
> > For CMake controlled buildsystem (as you're coming here from latest dev- |
| 12 |
> > games/simgear), there's no automatic way of building both static and |
| 13 |
> > shared libs (simgear allows to choose just one). |
| 14 |
> > This is why I removed static libs support that you proposed for dev- |
| 15 |
> > games/simgear (similar to ruby eclass abi handling - manually calling |
| 16 |
> > phases twice to build package 1st as shared, 2nd time as static). |
| 17 |
> > This is what I called "not worth the effort" in private discussion with |
| 18 |
> > you, not quite "I don't care for static libs" :) |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> Guessing in the worst case, you can do a double compile to get around |
| 21 |
> this, no? And yes, that's freaking horrible, just verifying cmake |
| 22 |
> isn't doing something special that blocks it. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Not sure why they would need to block it, one build dir for static, second one |
| 25 |
for shared. All safely separated (still stinks as a hack). |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
> Is upstream doing anything about this, or is it not on their |
| 28 |
> radar/list-of-things-they-care-about ? |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Off the radar. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
CMake provides equivalent of '--enable-static --disable-shared' and '-- |
| 33 |
disable-static --enable-shared' by the means of BUIlLD_SHARED_LIBS and not |
| 34 |
specifying linkage when defining library: |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
add_library(foo src1 src2) |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
It doesn't automatically provide both at the same time however. CMake is |
| 39 |
cross-platform (meaning it support different generators: GNU Make, NMake, |
| 40 |
Visual Studio Project, XCode etc) so their main audience aren't "distros", |
| 41 |
also on Windows for instance when shared .dll is created, also import .lib is |
| 42 |
created. If static .lib was to be created as well, they would need to have |
| 43 |
separate build subdir for it (and a bit more complex library resolution |
| 44 |
algorithm). |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
Still, if developer bothers enough to provide them both, he can easily |
| 47 |
implement it in buildsystem with explicitly given linkage (and separate target |
| 48 |
names): |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
set(foo_SRC src1 src2) |
| 51 |
add_library(foo SHARED ${foo_SRC}) |
| 52 |
if (ENABLE_STATIC) |
| 53 |
add_library(foo_static STATIC ${foo_SRC}) |
| 54 |
endif () |
| 55 |
|
| 56 |
That being said I can understand why it's off the radar - technically |
| 57 |
everything is already available, likely not worth the effort and in many cases |
| 58 |
building both static/shared is actually not needed. |
| 59 |
|
| 60 |
-- |
| 61 |
regards |
| 62 |
MM |
Archives