Le 16/11/2008 09:44, Michael Haubenwallner a écrit :
Never *unconditionally* switch back from libltdl to dlopen&co in source
code, as it is likely to break many non-linux platforms (Darwin, AIX,
HP-UX, ...).
I perfectly know this. My comment was *exactly* made to point out that
we cannot fix a
On Fri, 2008-11-14 at 15:35 +0100, Rémi Cardona wrote:
> Alexis Ballier a écrit :
> > Hi,
> >
> >> (I think pulseaudio is fixed, actually.)
> >
> > For what it's worth: removing the .la files from pulseaudio breaks its
> > module loading on freebsd; and it's an elf system. I don't know what
> >
On Friday 14 November 2008 14:25:30 Alexis Ballier wrote:
> Moreover .la files are good when you want to link statically to some
> library because they carry the needed information; they should be
> punted only when said library provides a good alternative (like a .pc
> file with correct libs.priva
On Fri, 14 Nov 2008 14:31:56 -0800
Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 15:25 Fri 14 Nov , Alexis Ballier wrote:
> > Moreover .la files are good when you want to link statically to some
> > library because they carry the needed information; they should be
> > punted only when said li
On 15:25 Fri 14 Nov , Alexis Ballier wrote:
> Moreover .la files are good when you want to link statically to some
> library because they carry the needed information; they should be
> punted only when said library provides a good alternative (like a .pc
> file with correct libs.private field).
On Fri, 14 Nov 2008 11:35:44 +0100
Gilles Dartiguelongue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Le mercredi 12 novembre 2008 à 18:16 +0100, Peter Alfredsen a écrit :
> [snip]
> > > Mart had already proposed a "static-lib" USE flag. Donnie just
> > > suggested on IRC we turn this use flag into a FEATURES fla
Alexis Ballier a écrit :
> Hi,
>
>> (I think pulseaudio is fixed, actually.)
>
> For what it's worth: removing the .la files from pulseaudio breaks its
> module loading on freebsd; and it's an elf system. I don't know what
> you mean by fixed
It's not fixed and it can't be. libtool's cross-plat
Hi,
> (I think pulseaudio is fixed, actually.)
For what it's worth: removing the .la files from pulseaudio breaks its
module loading on freebsd; and it's an elf system. I don't know what
you mean by fixed and I didn't investigate this but restoring the .la
files in the ebuild allowed me to make i
Le mercredi 12 novembre 2008 à 18:16 +0100, Peter Alfredsen a écrit :
[snip]
> > Mart had already proposed a "static-lib" USE flag. Donnie just
> > suggested on IRC we turn this use flag into a FEATURES flag.
>
> That's problematic. You can't turn off a FEATURES flag for individual
> packages. Se
On 18:16 Wed 12 Nov , Peter Alfredsen wrote:
> On Wednesday 12 November 2008, Rémi Cardona wrote:
> > Mart had already proposed a "static-lib" USE flag. Donnie just
> > suggested on IRC we turn this use flag into a FEATURES flag.
>
> That's problematic. You can't turn off a FEATURES flag for i
On 17:24 Wed 12 Nov , Peter Alfredsen wrote:
> On Wednesday 12 November 2008, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > And for people who want to build things statically.
>
> That's true, but we generally don't want to do that, so that's fine.
> If needed for a package, we just don't punt la files for it a
On Wednesday 12 November 2008, Mart Raudsepp wrote:
> On K, 2008-11-12 at 15:40 +0100, Peter Alfredsen wrote:
> > It's a utility function. I've done all I can to ensure it'll be
> > used wisely. Whether it is used wisely is between you and ( $ROOT
> > or $666 ). But let me point out that in most l
On Wednesday 12 November 2008, Rémi Cardona wrote:
> Le 12/11/2008 15:40, Peter Alfredsen a écrit :
> > But let me point out that in most leaf-packages, removing la files
> > will cause no pain, but will ensure that they do not have to be
> > rebuilt if a .la-listed dependency loses its .la file.
>
On Wednesday 12 November 2008, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On 18:34 Sun 09 Nov , Peter Alfredsen wrote:
> > "I've been told" that .la files are really only needed on non-ELF
> > systems and with plugin systems that use dlopen.
>
> And for people who want to build things statically.
That's true, b
On K, 2008-11-12 at 15:40 +0100, Peter Alfredsen wrote:
> On Wednesday 12 November 2008, Mart Raudsepp wrote:
>
> > I heavily object to having any such function introduced or used or
> > equivalent .la removals conducted without a good rationale and
> > explanation of why this is the approach take
Le 12/11/2008 15:40, Peter Alfredsen a écrit :
But let me point out that in most leaf-packages, removing la files will
cause no pain, but will ensure that they do not have to be rebuilt if
a .la-listed dependency loses its .la file.
Mart, others and myself have already tried removing .la files
On 18:34 Sun 09 Nov , Peter Alfredsen wrote:
> "I've been told" that .la files are really only needed on non-ELF
> systems and with plugin systems that use dlopen.
And for people who want to build things statically.
--
Thanks,
Donnie
Donnie Berkholz
Developer, Gentoo Linux
Blog: http://dbe
On Wednesday 12 November 2008, Mart Raudsepp wrote:
> I heavily object to having any such function introduced or used or
> equivalent .la removals conducted without a good rationale and
> explanation of why this is the approach taken. I see no such
> explanation anywhere, you are just blatantly re
On P, 2008-11-09 at 18:34 +0200, Peter Alfredsen wrote:
> On Sunday 09 November 2008, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> > On 09-11-2008 18:04:05 +0200, Peter Alfredsen wrote:
> > > + # If this is a non-ELF system, chances are good that the .la
> > > files will be needed. + if type -P scanelf &> /dev/null
>
On 09-11-2008 19:46:12 +0200, Peter Alfredsen wrote:
> > Ok. What worries me though is that this would result in some systems
> > having libtool files whereas the majority does not. E.g. removing
> > them apparently fixes a problem that then crops up on those systems
> > or something. Can't thin
On Sunday 09 November 2008, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> You could identify ELF a bit more reliable by running file on e.g.
> "${ROOT}/bin/bash", or just by building a list of CHOSTs that you
> know are ELF systems.
D'oh, should have thought of that. See attached patch.
> > > > + debug-
On 09-11-2008 18:34:31 +0200, Peter Alfredsen wrote:
> On Sunday 09 November 2008, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> > On 09-11-2008 18:04:05 +0200, Peter Alfredsen wrote:
> > > + # If this is a non-ELF system, chances are good that the .la
> > > files will be needed. + if type -P scanelf &> /dev/null
> >
On Sunday 09 November 2008, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 09-11-2008 18:04:05 +0200, Peter Alfredsen wrote:
> > + # If this is a non-ELF system, chances are good that the .la
> > files will be needed. + if type -P scanelf &> /dev/null
>
> I think this is a not so cool way to check for an ELF sys
On 09-11-2008 18:04:05 +0200, Peter Alfredsen wrote:
> + # If this is a non-ELF system, chances are good that the .la files will
> be needed.
> + if type -P scanelf &> /dev/null
I think this is a not so cool way to check for an ELF system.
> + then
> + debug-print "Scanel
24 matches
Mail list logo
