On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 05:52:26AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 11:17 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> >> >> Now it becomes a monthly topic:
> >> >>
> >> >> https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2015-01/msg00089.html
> >> >
> >> > Thanks, I hadn't seen that before. Alan Modra makes some
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 11:17 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 01:54:17PM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
>> > On Wed, 2015-02-18 at 12:53 -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> >> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 12:32 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
>> >> > T
Hi!
On Thu, 19 Feb 2015 08:54:46 +0100, I wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Jan 2015 17:00:59 +0100, Tristan Gingold
> wrote:
> >
> > > On 07 Jan 2015, at 15:45, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> > > This patch enhances config/zlib.m4 to introduce an extra option
> > > --with-libz-prefix which allows us to provide the
Hi!
On Wed, 7 Jan 2015 17:00:59 +0100, Tristan Gingold wrote:
>
> > On 07 Jan 2015, at 15:45, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> > This patch enhances config/zlib.m4 to introduce an extra option
> > --with-libz-prefix which allows us to provide the location of
> > the zlib library we want to use during th
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 01:54:17PM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > On Wed, 2015-02-18 at 12:53 -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 12:32 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> >> > That doesn't seem like a smart default. And why is is Linux/x86
> Why do you want to turn off zlib? On Linux/x86, zlib is required
> for assembler. At least, you should issue an error when --without-libz
> is used in binutils for Linux/x86 target.
I am trying to do the exact opposite, which is to provide an option
to compile WITH zlib, but using an install a
On 18 Feb 2015 14:24, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 2:21 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > i think we already have the reports: multiple people don't think it should
> > be
> > (1) x86-specific or (2) required. don't get me wrong -- i think having
> > support
> > like this is great. that
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 2:21 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On 18 Feb 2015 13:54, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
>> > On Wed, 2015-02-18 at 12:53 -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> >> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 12:32 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
>> >> > That doesn't seem like
On 18 Feb 2015 13:54, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > On Wed, 2015-02-18 at 12:53 -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 12:32 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> >> > That doesn't seem like a smart default. And why is is Linux/x86 only?
> >> > Shouldn'
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-02-18 at 12:53 -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 12:32 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
>> > That doesn't seem like a smart default. And why is is Linux/x86 only?
>> > Shouldn't that be something that is done explicitly b
On Wed, 2015-02-18 at 12:53 -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 12:32 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > That doesn't seem like a smart default. And why is is Linux/x86 only?
> > Shouldn't that be something that is done explicitly by a distro
> > configuring binutils after making sure it act
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 12:32 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-02-18 at 11:52 -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 11:44 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> > On 18 Feb 2015 08:58, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> >> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 8:54 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> >> >> Why do you want to
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 09:32:21PM +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > Can you elaborate?
>
> That doesn't seem like a smart default. And why is is Linux/x86 only?
> Shouldn't that be something that is done explicitly by a distro
> configuring binutils after making sure it actually is beneficial
> (de
On Wed, 2015-02-18 at 11:52 -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 11:44 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On 18 Feb 2015 08:58, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 8:54 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> >> >> Why do you want to turn off zlib? On Linux/x86, zlib is required
> >> >> for ass
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 11:44 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On 18 Feb 2015 08:58, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 8:54 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> > On 18 Feb 2015 04:56, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> >> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 4:08 AM, Joel Brobecker wrote:
>> >> > On Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 06:45:48PM
On 18 Feb 2015 08:58, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 8:54 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On 18 Feb 2015 04:56, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 4:08 AM, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> >> > On Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 06:45:48PM +0400, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> >> >> This patch enhances confi
On 2/18/2015 10:54 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On 18 Feb 2015 04:56, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 4:08 AM, Joel Brobecker
>> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 06:45:48PM +0400, Joel Brobecker wrote:
This patch enhances config/zlib.m4 to introduce an extra option
--with-li
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 8:54 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On 18 Feb 2015 04:56, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 4:08 AM, Joel Brobecker
>> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 06:45:48PM +0400, Joel Brobecker wrote:
>> >> This patch enhances config/zlib.m4 to introduce an extra option
>>
On 18 Feb 2015 04:56, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 4:08 AM, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 06:45:48PM +0400, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> >> This patch enhances config/zlib.m4 to introduce an extra option
> >> --with-libz-prefix which allows us to provide the location of
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 4:08 AM, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> Yay? Nay?
>
> Thank you.
>
> On Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 06:45:48PM +0400, Joel Brobecker wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> This patch enhances config/zlib.m4 to introduce an extra option
>> --with-libz-prefix which allows us to provide the location of
>>
> What is the rational for having --with-zlib but --with-libz-prefix
> (ie zlib vs libz) ? Looks not very consistent.
I agree it's unfortunate, but it is unavoidable if I want to keep the
current option as it is (compatibility), and reuse AC_LIB_HAVE_LINKFLAGS
(which is a fairly complex function)
> On 21 Jan 2015, at 08:47, Joel Brobecker wrote:
>
> Thank you! :)
What is the rational for having --with-zlib but --with-libz-prefix
(ie zlib vs libz) ? Looks not very consistent.
Tristan.
>
> On Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 06:45:48PM +0400, Joel Brobecker wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> This patch enha
> > This patch enhances config/zlib.m4 to introduce an extra option
> > --with-libz-prefix which allows us to provide the location of
> > the zlib library we want to use during the build.
>
> I prefer the gcc way to provide external library:
>
> --with-zlib -> system zlib used
> --with-zlib=pathn
> On 07 Jan 2015, at 15:45, Joel Brobecker wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> This patch enhances config/zlib.m4 to introduce an extra option
> --with-libz-prefix which allows us to provide the location of
> the zlib library we want to use during the build.
I prefer the gcc way to provide external library:
24 matches
Mail list logo
