On Mon 28 Apr 2014 09:32:40 Salz, Rich wrote:
While rpaths are not needed in some contexts, they are important in
others, please do not remove rpath support.
Yes, such as cross-compiling or embedded systems. I think it's reasonable
to make it a config option tho.
eh ? rpaths are not
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 02:10:14AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Mon 28 Apr 2014 09:32:40 Salz, Rich wrote:
While rpaths are not needed in some contexts, they are important in
others, please do not remove rpath support.
Yes, such as cross-compiling or embedded systems. I think it's
On Mon 16 Jun 2014 06:39:40 Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 02:10:14AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Mon 28 Apr 2014 09:32:40 Salz, Rich wrote:
While rpaths are not needed in some contexts, they are important in
others, please do not remove rpath support.
Yes,
On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 01:27:02AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thu 05 Jun 2014 22:53:32 Matt Caswell via RT wrote:
On Sun Apr 27 13:04:20 2014, vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
It's a standard setting that other build systems use.
Can you explain why you need this?
because people want to
On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 01:27:02AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thu 05 Jun 2014 22:53:32 Matt Caswell via RT wrote:
On Sun Apr 27 13:04:20 2014, vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
It's a standard setting that other build systems use.
Can you explain why you need this?
because people want to
On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 09:15:02AM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
I ended up using the cflags in Configure for that.
I wrote a script that takes the output of Configure TABLE to
extract the settings for my desired target, makes appropriate
additions to the desired field, and then runs Configure with
[mailto:owner-openssl-...@openssl.org] On
Behalf Of Viktor Dukhovni
Sent: Friday, June 06, 2014 10:31 AM
To: openssl-dev@openssl.org
Subject: Re: [openssl.org #3331] [PATCH] respect LDFLAGS during build
On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 09:15:02AM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
I ended up using the cflags
On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 10:42:06AM -0400, Salz, Rich wrote:
Perhaps Configure should have a -f nnn flag, that lets folks
add their own local table without having to patch the script
I think this misses the point, one can already just pass a table
entry on the command-line as a colon-separated
I think this misses the point, one can already just pass a table entry on the
command-line as a colon-separated target name.
Yes, you're right, I was mis-using the thread.
But putting a config spec on the command line is, shall we say, awkward. And
adding the flag would help with code
On Fri 06 Jun 2014 09:15:09 Kurt Roeckx via RT wrote:
On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 01:27:02AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thu 05 Jun 2014 22:53:32 Matt Caswell via RT wrote:
On Sun Apr 27 13:04:20 2014, vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
It's a standard setting that other build systems use.
On Fri 06 Jun 2014 09:15:09 Kurt Roeckx via RT wrote:
On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 01:27:02AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thu 05 Jun 2014 22:53:32 Matt Caswell via RT wrote:
On Sun Apr 27 13:04:20 2014, vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
It's a standard setting that other build systems use.
On Thu 05 Jun 2014 22:53:32 Matt Caswell via RT wrote:
On Sun Apr 27 13:04:20 2014, vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
It's a standard setting that other build systems use.
Can you explain why you need this?
because people want to set custom linker flags. `man ld` shows quite a large
number that
On Thu 05 Jun 2014 22:53:32 Matt Caswell via RT wrote:
On Sun Apr 27 13:04:20 2014, vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
It's a standard setting that other build systems use.
Can you explain why you need this?
because people want to set custom linker flags. `man ld` shows quite a large
number that
While rpaths are not needed in some contexts, they are important in others,
please do not remove rpath support.
Yes, such as cross-compiling or embedded systems. I think it's reasonable to
make it a config option tho.
/r$
--
Principal Security Engineer
Akamai Technologies,
-DO_GNU_APP=LDFLAGS=$(CFLAGS) -Wl,-rpath,$(LIBRPATH)
+DO_GNU_APP=LDFLAGS=$(LDFLAGS) $(CFLAGS)
Shouldn't that be this?
+DO_GNU_APP=LDFLAGS=$(LDFLAGS) -Wl,-rpath,$(LIBRPATH)
But then I think think that we shouldn't have rpaths in the first
place, so I wouldn't have a problem with removing the
On Sun 27 Apr 2014 14:08:12 Kurt Roeckx via RT wrote:
-DO_GNU_APP=LDFLAGS=$(CFLAGS) -Wl,-rpath,$(LIBRPATH)
+DO_GNU_APP=LDFLAGS=$(LDFLAGS) $(CFLAGS)
Shouldn't that be this?
+DO_GNU_APP=LDFLAGS=$(LDFLAGS) -Wl,-rpath,$(LIBRPATH)
i didn't mean to include dropping of the rpath in this change.
On Sun 27 Apr 2014 14:08:12 Kurt Roeckx via RT wrote:
-DO_GNU_APP=LDFLAGS=$(CFLAGS) -Wl,-rpath,$(LIBRPATH)
+DO_GNU_APP=LDFLAGS=$(LDFLAGS) $(CFLAGS)
Shouldn't that be this?
+DO_GNU_APP=LDFLAGS=$(LDFLAGS) -Wl,-rpath,$(LIBRPATH)
i didn't mean to include dropping of the rpath in this change.
On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 02:08:12PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx via RT wrote:
But then I think think that we shouldn't have rpaths in the first
place, so I wouldn't have a problem with removing the rpath.
While rpaths are not needed in some contexts, they are important
in others, please do not remove
18 matches
Mail list logo
