On Mon, 2017-11-27 at 09:46 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> There are several problems with forceful --as-needed:
> 1) forcing it everywhere is a workaround to broken tools that add -l*
> options just in case (like auto*, libtool, pkg-config)
pkg-config isn't broken here. Individual pc files might
On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 09:21:16AM +0100, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 11:01 PM, Tomasz Kłoczko
> wrote:
> > On 13 November 2017 at 10:52, Björn 'besser82' Esser
> > wrote:
>
> > However AFAIK only reason of any issues related to use -Wl,--as-needed
> > is using WRONG list
On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 11:01 PM, Tomasz Kłoczko
wrote:
> On 13 November 2017 at 10:52, Björn 'besser82' Esser
> wrote:
> However AFAIK only reason of any issues related to use -Wl,--as-needed
> is using WRONG list -l parameters (lack of some -l) and this
> needs to be not treated by apply some
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Tue, 2017-11-21 at 18:09 +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
> On 21 November 2017 at 16:36, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> [..]
> > > > > > Counting numbers of affected packages by guessing is very bad idea.
> > > > >
> > > > > Call it educated guess if
On 21 November 2017 at 16:36, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
[..]
>> > > > Counting numbers of affected packages by guessing is very bad idea.
>> > >
>> > > Call it educated guess if you want.
>> >
>> > You know, there is a way to get more reliable data: do scratch builds of
>> > all Fedora packages an
On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 05:22:32PM +0100, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
> On 11/21/2017 04:12 PM, David Tardon wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 01:54:13PM +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
> > > On 21 November 2017 at 10:43, Igor Gnatenko
> > > wrote:
> > > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > > > Hash
On 11/21/2017 04:12 PM, David Tardon wrote:
On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 01:54:13PM +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
On 21 November 2017 at 10:43, Igor Gnatenko
wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Tue, 2017-11-21 at 10:26 +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
So is it any final decision
Hello,
On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 01:54:13PM +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
> On 21 November 2017 at 10:43, Igor Gnatenko
> wrote:
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA256
> >
> > On Tue, 2017-11-21 at 10:26 +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
> >> So is it any final decision about start use b
On 21 November 2017 at 10:43, Igor Gnatenko
wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On Tue, 2017-11-21 at 10:26 +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
>> So is it any final decision about start use by default --as-needed in
>> linker options?
>
> Can you link Change Proposal you (or s
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Tue, 2017-11-21 at 10:26 +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
> So is it any final decision about start use by default --as-needed in
> linker options?
Can you link Change Proposal you (or someone else) submitted? I have not heard
anything about that.
>
So is it any final decision about start use by default --as-needed in
linker options?
Looking again on whole discussion across this thread and on
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/redhat-rpm-config/pull-request/3 I
don't see any arguments against start use --as-needed by default so
looks like onl
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Tue, 2017-11-14 at 07:14 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 7:08 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > On 11/14/2017 12:50 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > >
> > > Then something isn't working correctly, because then libcomps builds
> > > shoul
On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 7:08 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 11/14/2017 12:50 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
>>
>> Then something isn't working correctly, because then libcomps builds
>> should be failing in Fedora. It doesn't. It fails in *every other
>> Linux distribution* that I've built it for (Mageia,
On 11/14/2017 12:50 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
Then something isn't working correctly, because then libcomps builds
should be failing in Fedora. It doesn't. It fails in *every other
Linux distribution* that I've built it for (Mageia, openSUSE,
OpenMandriva, Solus, and others...) unless I patch it to d
On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 6:45 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> On 11/14/2017 01:32 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 2:07 AM, Florian Weimer
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 11/14/2017 03:54 AM, Philip Kovacs wrote:
One concern is that -Wl,--as-needed requires greater accuracy wit
On 11/14/2017 01:32 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 2:07 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
On 11/14/2017 03:54 AM, Philip Kovacs wrote:
One concern is that -Wl,--as-needed requires greater accuracy with the
ordering of objects and
libraries as you link. Also, if a package uses a libra
On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 2:07 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 11/14/2017 03:54 AM, Philip Kovacs wrote:
>>
>> One concern is that -Wl,--as-needed requires greater accuracy with the
>> ordering of objects and
>> libraries as you link. Also, if a package uses a library indirectly,
>> i.e. A uses C v
On 11/14/2017 03:54 AM, Philip Kovacs wrote:
One concern is that -Wl,--as-needed requires greater accuracy with the ordering
of objects and
libraries as you link. Also, if a package uses a library indirectly, i.e. A uses C
via B: A -> B -> C,--as-needed will peel away C and break A unless A e
One concern is that -Wl,--as-needed requires greater accuracy with the ordering
of objects and
libraries as you link. Also, if a package uses a library indirectly, i.e. A
uses C via B: A -> B -> C,--as-needed will peel away C and break A unless A
explicitly mentions its need for C. Of course
On 13 November 2017 at 22:01, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
[..]
> In other words -Wl,--as-needed should be used everywhere WITHOUT exceptions.
> Easiest way apply this globally in Fedora is add --as-needed in
> /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-hardened-ld spec file by apply patch:
>
> --- /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/r
On 13 November 2017 at 10:52, Björn 'besser82' Esser
wrote:
[..]
> that specific flag should be in LDFLAGS, but there are reasons, we do
> NOT have it in there, because it will likely break any binaries built
> from or containing FORTRAN sources. They will simply SEGFAULT, because
> `-Wl,--as-nee
On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 7:21 AM, Michael Catanzaro
wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 5:06 AM, Daniel P. Berrange
> wrote:
>>
>> What % of our distro involves fortran though ? Could this be as simple as
>> enabling it by default, but having an easy way via an RPM macro to opt-out
>> of it in the ha
On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 5:06 AM, Daniel P. Berrange
wrote:
What % of our distro involves fortran though ? Could this be as
simple as enabling it by default, but having an easy way via an RPM
macro to opt-out of it in the handleful of packages that matter wrt
fortran.
If Debian/Ubuntu/openSUS
On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 11:52:14AM +0100, Björn 'besser82' Esser wrote:
> Am Montag, den 13.11.2017, 11:02 +0100 schrieb Igor Gnatenko:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I'm interested why we still don't have this flag in our CFLAGS? It
> > seems that
> > other distributions like openSUSE enable it by default an
Am Montag, den 13.11.2017, 11:02 +0100 schrieb Igor Gnatenko:
> Hello,
>
> I'm interested why we still don't have this flag in our CFLAGS? It
> seems that
> other distributions like openSUSE enable it by default and it helps
> in many
> cases to avoid over-linking (for example, see thread about po
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Hello,
I'm interested why we still don't have this flag in our CFLAGS? It seems that
other distributions like openSUSE enable it by default and it helps in many
cases to avoid over-linking (for example, see thread about poppler).
Are there any reas
26 matches
Mail list logo