Nikos Chantziaras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Sat, 26 Jul 2008 02:54:07 +0300:
> Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote: >> Le jeudi 24 juillet 2008 à 18:36 +0200, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar >> Arahesis a écrit : >>> I would like to suggest new policy stating that packages should >>> respect LDFLAGS. >>> This policy is required to allow QA team to fix packages which ignore >>> LDFLAGS. >>> >> this question might sound stupid, but what are you actually trying to >> fix ? What do these packages do or do not do by ignoring your ldflags >> that is so crucial to you ? > > "-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common,--as-needed" In particular, --as-needed makes a HUGE very practical difference. It may or may not be the wrong answer to the problem in theory, but lacking anything even close to as workable right now, that alone is IMO reason enough to work to get LDFLAGS honored. I appreciate the difference it made here every time I run revdep-rebuild! That's what makes observation of LDFLAGS very practically critical to me. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
