Re: Ideas for additional large scale tests
On Tue, Feb 27, 2007, Bastian Venthur wrote:
> Just one thought: Why not test "-Wl,--as-needed" too? It should greatly
> reduce the number of dependencies for most packages without the tedious
> and error-prone task to re-libtoolize the package for every new release.
--as-needed would also be a test, but it's too dangerous to do before
everything builds with -z defs; I experienced breakage with this option
between an application and its modules, and it was only visible at
runtime.
--as-needed also exposed toolchain issues on non-i386 arches, which
_is_ interesting. :)
> I'd also like to know how many percent of our packages which could be
> re-libtoolized actually are re-libtolized (my guess is < 20%) and if we
> can do something to improve the situation.
Well, it would be nice to push the libtool patch upstream. My guess is
that the recursive pulling of all libs could be kept in a separate
field of the *.la files instead of suppressing that behavior
completely, but I didn't look at the actual patch which was sent
upstream (and not applied so far).
--
Loïc Minier <lool@dooz.org>
Reply to: