On Sat, Apr 05, 2003, Michael Schloh wrote:
> Force use of binutils ld command, removing the incompatible mapfile
> flag if it exists. Also, manually build the static library if only a
> shared one was built.
> [...]
> @@ -41,7 +41,7 @@
> # build information
> Prefix: %{l_prefix}
> BuildRoot: %{l_buildroot}
> -BuildPreReq: OpenPKG, openpkg >= 20020206
> +BuildPreReq: OpenPKG, openpkg >= 20020206, binutils
> PreReq: OpenPKG, openpkg >= 20020206
> AutoReq: no
> AutoReqProv: no
> @@ -68,7 +68,14 @@
> Imakefile
> xmkmf
> %{l_make} %{l_mflags -O} Makefiles
> - %{l_make} %{l_mflags -O}
> + %{l_shtool} subst \
> + -e 's; -M mapfile;;g' \
> + Makefile
> + %{l_make} %{l_mflags -O} LD=%{l_prefix}/bin/ld MAKE=%{l_prefix}/bin/make
> + if [ ! -f libXaw3d.a ]; then
> + %{l_prefix}/bin/ar -rs libXaw3d.a *.o
> + ranlib libXaw3d.a
> + fi
Errr... a few issues:
1. You're using %{l_prefix}/bin/make. Either you then need also a
dependency to "make" or you have to use %{l_make} instead.
Additionally, MAKE should be implicitly set by at least GNU make, so
if you depend on GNU make you do not need MAKE=%{l_make} at all.
2. Why to the hell should libXaw3d.a not be built? Instead of
doing it manually (and hopefully the right way) I would
expect that one fixes the real problem instead.
3. Why is GNU binutils required? Just because you want to reference
"ar" and "ld" directly? Then LD=ld and AR=ar would be sufficient
because they _HAVE_ to be in $PATH. Or is GNU binutils really
requires for functionality reasons?
Ralf S. Engelschall
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.engelschall.com
______________________________________________________________________
The OpenPKG Project www.openpkg.org
Developer Communication List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
