On Tuesday, April 23, 2002, at 06:21 AM, Chris Zubrzycki wrote: > > should we maybe start to use this in our package's LDFLAGS? It might > make finding real errors easier, especially with packages like xfree, > where I get a *lot* of these warnings. I had wondered if there was an > option like this, and now I found it :-) > >
Would it be better to use the two-level namespace support of ld instead of fighting against it? I'm not trying to be confrontational, I just would like to know the best way of handling linker issues. It seems to me that the use of -flat_namespace just raises the need for a bunch of other flags like -undefined suppress and -multiply_defined suppress. I'm concerned about all the `suppress' options hiding problems that really ought to be fixed properly. -- Eric Norum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Department of Electrical Engineering University of Saskatchewan Saskatoon, Canada. Phone: (306) 966-5394 FAX: (306) 966-5407 _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
