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
Tobias Scherbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Thu, 13
Nov 2008 18:21:38 +0100:
> Wikipedia started using an extension for marking pages as "validated".
> See [1]. This would allow us to setup a group of "trusted people"
> (developers, long-time users, well-kno
On Wed, 12 Nov 2008 18:31:47 +0100
Peter Alfredsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wednesday 12 November 2008, Mart Raudsepp wrote:
> > There is still no solution for things that do not break ABI, but get
> > rebuilt with different USE flags, for example the USE=esd fiasco
> > where to get rid of
I've already written about the possibility of creating an ebuild to
simply _replace_ the entire buildsystem of a package if it's
non-existant (simple .c file thrown around by upstream), too minimal
and/or impossible to get upstream do adapt, or as a temporary measure
until upstream is beaten into
On Wed, 12 Nov 2008 18:31:47 +0100
Peter Alfredsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wednesday 12 November 2008, Mart Raudsepp wrote:
> > There is still no solution for things that do not break ABI, but get
> > rebuilt with different USE flags, for example the USE=esd fiasco
> > where to get rid o
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
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
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
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 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 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 Friday 14 November 2008, Ryan Hill wrote:
> > [Snip more pie-in-the-sky]
> >
> > Show me the code, please.
>
> If you weren't interested in hearing differing opinions, then why did
> you ask in the first place? :P
I just thought it sounded like a tall order, saying that fixing
libtool .la fi
On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 00:05:52 +0100
Peter Alfredsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I just thought it sounded like a tall order, saying that fixing
> libtool .la files would take some weekends to do, when this problem
> has existed for so long, yet noone has been able to fix it in a way
> that causes
On Sat, 2008-11-15 at 00:05 +0100, Peter Alfredsen wrote:
> Anyway, we really need to start punting .la files one way or the other.
> For desktop users of our distro, they do a lot more harm than good. For
> embedded, perhaps static linking serves some purpose, but really, if
> you can't afford
Mart Raudsepp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
excerpted below, on Sat, 15 Nov 2008 02:26:52 +0200:
> This is because during
> static linking all functions that are not used can be discarded from the
> final binary, while with shared libraries all the code has to remain,
> because it
15 matches
Mail list logo
