Hi Ben,

>  1. write a checkpkg test to test if direct binding if properly enabled in
> > a package,
>
> How do you envision this check being implemented?  As a positive or
> negative check?
>

Well I think negative check is a better way to make sure direct binding is
enabled in packages ;)
Besides it's the way checkpkg works, doesn't it ?

Of course, maintainers will be able to override the check (like other
checkpkg tests), but at least they will need to do it on purpose.


> >  2. enable Direct Binding manually for a reduced set of packages (at
> least
> > my packages :) )
> >      (we just have to pass "-Bdirect" to SUN ld)
>
> I see you're doing this already! +1
>

Want to join me on this so we have a wider packages set ? :)


> >  3. wait a bit to see if something unexpected happens :)
> >  3. if it works, enable it by globally adding the option to LINKER_FLAGS
> >  4. enable the checkpkg direct binding test by default so we can catch
> even
> > packages that don't use LDFLAGS
>
> +1.  I think it's a sound plan.
>

Thank you for your feedback !

Yann
_______________________________________________
maintainers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
.:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::.

Reply via email to