Hi, On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 17:23:07 +0200 Mike Hommey <[email protected]> wrote: > You have two solutions: > - Implement architecture specific symbol files. You have facilities like > includes, so that it can be easier, but since there is a symbol missing, > it might be painful. > - Seeing what the symbols look like, it actually seems these symbols > shouldn't be exported in the first place[1] > It would fail to build on the architecture you use when building your > packages, if you'd try to build with DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=noopt (provided > your debian/rules file does the right thing in such a case, i.e. > switching to -O0 instead of -O2). > Using a version script to filter these out could be a solution. > See https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=22106&action=view , for > example. > > I'd personally go for the second.
I don't fully understand the second solution, but it seems to be that smart way to do. First, I would fix for alpha with first, Michal also suggest one, and then I'll try the second one. Thanks! -- Regards, Hideki Yamane henrich @ debian.or.jp/iijmio-mail.jp http://wiki.debian.org/HidekiYamane -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
