[gentoo-dev] Useflag static split

[gentoo-dev] Useflag static split

[Luca Barbato]

Lately I found lots of problems and inconsistency for the useflag static.

Sometimes it means "build only static", sometimes "build static and shared".

The problem:

If you need to build something static you need the static libs.

If the use flag depend is allowed probably that could be a dirty 
solution. Luckly it isn't yet, so we have to find a cleaner one:

1- split static in static and static-lib (static-lib will make the 
library build also the static version, static will build _just_ the 
static lib)

2- make everly library build always the static library and let use 
static just apply for executables.

Tell me what you think

lu

PS: some annoying examples: qemu:qemu-fast, openssh:static

-- 
Luca Barbato
Developer
Gentoo Linux				http://www.gentoo.org/~lu_zero



--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Useflag static split

[Mike Frysinger]

On Monday 22 November 2004 10:12 am, Luca Barbato wrote:
> 2- make everly library build always the static library and let use
> static just apply for executables.

this is the way to go i think ...

if users dont want .a libraries on their system, i think the way to go is with 
iggy's INSTALL_MASK patch rather than a USE system
-mike

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Useflag static split

[Donnie Berkholz]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 836 bytes --]

On Mon, 2004-11-22 at 16:12 +0100, Luca Barbato wrote:
> Lately I found lots of problems and inconsistency for the useflag static.
> 
> Sometimes it means "build only static", sometimes "build static and shared".
> 
> The problem:
> 
> If you need to build something static you need the static libs.
> 
> If the use flag depend is allowed probably that could be a dirty 
> solution. Luckly it isn't yet, so we have to find a cleaner one:
> 
> 1- split static in static and static-lib (static-lib will make the 
> library build also the static version, static will build _just_ the 
> static lib)
> 
> 2- make everly library build always the static library and let use 
> static just apply for executables.

Something like nptl+nptlonly makes a decent parallel -- static
+staticonly.

But Mike makes a good point.

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Useflag static split

[Donnie Berkholz]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 680 bytes --]

On Mon, 2004-11-22 at 10:31 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Monday 22 November 2004 10:12 am, Luca Barbato wrote:
> > 2- make everly library build always the static library and let use
> > static just apply for executables.
> 
> this is the way to go i think ...
> 
> if users dont want .a libraries on their system, i think the way to go is with 
> iggy's INSTALL_MASK patch rather than a USE system

At some point, it's difficult to discern whether something should be a
USE flag or a FEATURE (e.g., static, debug).

The problem I see is that you pointlessly build static libs, then delete
them. It makes a lot more sense to not create them in the first place.

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Useflag static split

[Paul de Vrieze]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1088 bytes --]

On Monday 22 November 2004 18:38, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On Mon, 2004-11-22 at 10:31 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Monday 22 November 2004 10:12 am, Luca Barbato wrote:
> > > 2- make everly library build always the static library and let use
> > > static just apply for executables.
> >
> > this is the way to go i think ...
> >
> > if users dont want .a libraries on their system, i think the way to go is
> > with iggy's INSTALL_MASK patch rather than a USE system
>
> At some point, it's difficult to discern whether something should be a
> USE flag or a FEATURE (e.g., static, debug).
>
> The problem I see is that you pointlessly build static libs, then delete
> them. It makes a lot more sense to not create them in the first place.

This and the fact that for some libraries the static versions must be built 
(for example for glibc there is a part of libc that is allways static), and 
for others that they only build against static versions.

Paul

-- 
Paul de Vrieze
Gentoo Developer
Mail: pauldv@gentoo.org
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]