| 1 |
Nikos Chantziaras <realnc@×××××.de> posted g6dp32$1sl$1@×××××××××.org, |
| 2 |
excerpted below, on Sat, 26 Jul 2008 02:54:07 +0300: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote: |
| 5 |
>> Le jeudi 24 juillet 2008 à 18:36 +0200, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar |
| 6 |
>> Arahesis a écrit : |
| 7 |
>>> I would like to suggest new policy stating that packages should |
| 8 |
>>> respect LDFLAGS. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
>>> This policy is required to allow QA team to fix packages which ignore |
| 11 |
>>> LDFLAGS. |
| 12 |
>>> |
| 13 |
>> this question might sound stupid, but what are you actually trying to |
| 14 |
>> fix ? What do these packages do or do not do by ignoring your ldflags |
| 15 |
>> that is so crucial to you ? |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> "-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common,--as-needed" |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
In particular, --as-needed makes a HUGE very practical difference. It |
| 20 |
may or may not be the wrong answer to the problem in theory, but lacking |
| 21 |
anything even close to as workable right now, that alone is IMO reason |
| 22 |
enough to work to get LDFLAGS honored. I appreciate the difference it |
| 23 |
made here every time I run revdep-rebuild! |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
That's what makes observation of LDFLAGS very practically critical to me. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
| 29 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
| 30 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |
Archives