Duncan wrote:
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.
Fortunately, the majority of ebuilds/packages are honoring LDFLAGS. Of
course it's kinda difficult to always check if a package honors it or
not. But it's a good idea to file a bug for every package that does not
honor it (without a reason).
