Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Mart Raudsepp <leio@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev]  Re: [RFC] New policy: LDFLAGS should be respected
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 01:18:13
Message-Id: 1217207887.2495.0.camel@localhost
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev]  Re: [RFC] New policy: LDFLAGS should be respected by Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
1 On P, 2008-07-27 at 18:20 +0200, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
2 wrote:
3 > 2008-07-26 02:56:24 Mart Raudsepp napisał(a):
4 > > On L, 2008-07-26 at 03:39 +0300, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
5 > > > Fortunately, the majority of ebuilds/packages are honoring LDFLAGS. Of
6 > > > course it's kinda difficult to always check if a package honors it or
7 > > > not. But it's a good idea to file a bug for every package that does not
8 > > > honor it (without a reason).
9 > >
10 > > I guess as many are using it to pass --hash-style=gnu in addition to
11 > > other things[1], an easy way to find out which don't honor it out of
12 > > your installed packages is to scan for ELF files that contain the .hash
13 > > ELF section in addition to .gnu.hash ELF section.
14 >
15 > The QA check which verifies that LDFLAGS are respected is now in Portage
16 > trunk and will be released in 2.2_rc4. This check is enabled when LDFLAGS
17 > contain "--hash-style=gnu" and "${PN}" != *-bin. Other binary packages
18 > (e.g. net-www/netscape-flash) should set the QA_DT_HASH array/variable.
19 >
20 > http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/portage?rev=11205&view=rev
21
22 You rock for actually putting this stuff to code!
23
24
25 --
26 Mart Raudsepp
27 Gentoo Developer
28 Mail: leio@g.o
29 Weblog: http://planet.gentoo.org/developers/leio

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature