On 10/6/2017 8:20 PM, James Almer wrote: > On 10/6/2017 5:20 PM, Marton Balint wrote: >> Signed-off-by: Marton Balint <c...@passwd.hu> >> --- >> Makefile | 3 +-- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile >> index 4a1253a052..adb8330fa0 100644 >> --- a/Makefile >> +++ b/Makefile >> @@ -97,8 +97,7 @@ include $(SRC_PATH)/doc/examples/Makefile >> libavcodec/utils.o libavformat/utils.o libavdevice/avdevice.o >> libavfilter/avfilter.o libavutil/utils.o libpostproc/postprocess.o >> libswresample/swresample.o libswscale/utils.o : libavutil/ffversion.h >> >> $(PROGS): %$(PROGSSUF)$(EXESUF): %$(PROGSSUF)_g$(EXESUF) >> - $(CP) $< $@ >> - $(STRIP) $@ >> + $(STRIP) -o $@ $< > > LGTM. This is the best thing after stripping on install, which seems to > be disliked.
Actually, configure seems to consider cases where STRIP is something else than binutils' strip. I guess it's known and tested to work with the to-be-stripped binary as the only argument, but would -o work with every potential strip program, or for that matter binutils on every supported platform? I already got bitten by MacOS's install not accepting -T. > >> >> %$(PROGSSUF)_g$(EXESUF): $(FF_DEP_LIBS) >> $(LD) $(LDFLAGS) $(LDEXEFLAGS) $(LD_O) $(OBJS-$*) $(FF_EXTRALIBS) >> > _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
