From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Ohn2c-0004DY-O3 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 07 Aug 2010 17:18:38 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8F6DBE09F3; Sat, 7 Aug 2010 17:18:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wy0-f181.google.com (mail-wy0-f181.google.com [74.125.82.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EAEDE09A2 for ; Sat, 7 Aug 2010 17:18:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wyf28 with SMTP id 28so3976010wyf.40 for ; Sat, 07 Aug 2010 10:18:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:subject:from:to:cc :in-reply-to:references:content-type:date:message-id:mime-version :x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding; bh=hvfBxggDPn2/5r8wShOea0zQU7xL/m7KAPh4j2r1co0=; b=EKpZbqmkHxamIEZFv5vJBmZJRT3Mbd3EqRxPXOfLzwAIw4B1e8JuqN4q/4RkVwpNeM XfHQLSb+2L4vXqCLkzbXV+D6YZTVKvTD01L7DFdq2ASdKAv6STLwRYSfHUEA4NjQ5osV jq0Z4GEaiUZe70KO0ExOKnnnnbWIkC/BCMyL0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:from:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date :message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding; b=EsiKjGFVqmC6l+cU7HAS2N7IKVfxwDPJKqSUX+kwj3M2a2rkjJ2ZqeRN41MOr4Znsl 4Jr8V1n5da+FP8tH9eIOdoCagnUVUFy8Djo/s4f7vKiXpJt76vN8AQrbyf50DDW0nObV WqmRvFC3C6daOlV+VDulsHWEQE3QvFvh03bL0= Received: by 10.227.129.84 with SMTP id n20mr11941803wbs.61.1281201491842; Sat, 07 Aug 2010 10:18:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.28.8.1] (host249-252-static.95-94-b.business.telecomitalia.it [94.95.252.249]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id b18sm2494181wbb.7.2010.08.07.10.18.08 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sat, 07 Aug 2010 10:18:10 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: Add --hash-style=gnu to LDFLAGS From: Diego Elio =?UTF-8?Q?=E2=80=9CFlameeyes=E2=80=9D_?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Petten=F2?= To: Markos Chandras Cc: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org, qa@gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <20100807163230.GA31575@Mystical> References: <20100807163230.GA31575@Mystical> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2010 19:18:55 +0200 Message-ID: <1281201535.29176.45.camel@yamato.local> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: b9af5b2a-42e1-432b-a8dd-8b0cc41ab4f0 X-Archives-Hash: d263a5073924bf2d9cc7f51d5683d1f8 Il giorno sab, 07/08/2010 alle 19.32 +0300, Markos Chandras ha scritto: >=20 > It seems like few of our fellow developers don't know how to track > down > packages that don't respect LDFLAGS. Adding -Wl,--hash-style=3Dgnu is a > good way > to do that. I would like to see this linker flag enabled by default on > LDFLAGS > (or at least for the dev/ profiles for now). Do you agree? >=20 It really depends on which glibc the profiles have been using: - >=3D 2.5 -> force --hash-style=3Dgnu, reduced link time and smaller files; - < 2.5 -> force --hash-style=3Dsysv, as above, but gnu would make lose the hash entirely. Somebody who works with uclibc should let us know which one of the two is actually supported by which uclibc. >=20 --=20 Diego Elio Petten=C3=B2 =E2=80=94 =E2=80=9CFlameeyes=E2=80=9D http://blog.flameeyes.eu/ If you found a .asc file in this mail and know not what it is, it's a GnuPG digital signature: http://www.gnupg.org/