From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1K2G8Z-0006kB-PF for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 31 May 2008 01:44:04 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 41096E03F3; Sat, 31 May 2008 01:44:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from py-out-1112.google.com (py-out-1112.google.com [64.233.166.177]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13113E03F3 for ; Sat, 31 May 2008 01:44:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id w53so143431pyg.25 for ; Fri, 30 May 2008 18:44:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:date:from:to:subject:message-id:references:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=igX4jxQbCQvvtWheFeIXVNpENALLyLjxjI+pVCbd3ZQ=; b=YHwFARau/Dj6fQj3xyv/go65C43riwlia77joILlKqjJySdOUSs2/Q32qmyDvOjQpXgmosHJNphohaOIvpHbU4Q7Ey59j1If3CN28ra6iK2xp8J/4Q8crDTGXyRFvHvQfgzQmQ0Th5UL2hZJeUFLKelrsqAkTr8HazR5wdxnT3w= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:references:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=oBlZnjITBaCi4DIzVgUHEZQlzKWqH+sbVagI3jBFqLb216Y0FZzz8m+V29I5ZC4wZjPKJNgex6+x59qj0kyxCl0HBqvkbI8rVp/Z1OSbVgec8fwvmX+GMGghhjy/cJ7Dc6NXzK8B25KCo4mDaoE9GBn4DmhIiQeXihaQhs34Cgg= Received: by 10.114.169.2 with SMTP id r2mr7090318wae.118.1212198241462; Fri, 30 May 2008 18:44:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from seldon ( [208.68.109.102]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id t1sm1082210poh.9.2008.05.30.18.44.00 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Fri, 30 May 2008 18:44:01 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 18:43:56 -0700 From: Brian Harring To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: --as-needed to default LDFLAGS (Was: RFC: Should preserve-libs be enabled by default?) Message-ID: <20080531014356.GB6931@seldon.metaweb.com> References: <20080530220743.GH17201@comet> <20080530231429.24970398@snowcone> <48408A36.2070608@gentoo.org> <20080531002644.41d9b7bf@snowcone> <484093C5.90902@gentoo.org> <20080531010259.52b8c105@snowcone> <4840990B.9040909@gentoo.org> <20080531013016.4aceedbb@snowcone> <4840A3EE.30708@gentoo.org> <20080531021748.4dd0b78e@snowcone> 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 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="A6N2fC+uXW/VQSAv" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080531021748.4dd0b78e@snowcone> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-Archives-Salt: 4fc979f0-0377-4a05-baea-dbd53581810e X-Archives-Hash: ddfcaa57979ffe92c5035fc6ea5abada --A6N2fC+uXW/VQSAv Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable While we can continually loop around w/ the "--as-needed is evil since=20 c++ does this one odd thing occasionally" argument, why not hear from=20 the folks using it, specifically finding out what breaks in their=20 usage? Ciaran: yes, just because the tree works now w/ --as-needed doesn't=20 mean that future pkg versions will work. Dumb argument however=20 (has shades of 'the sky is falling') since *every* new version is=20 untested and has the potential to break against our accepted build=20 environments (or to break pre-existing pkgs). That's a known issue,=20 and dealt with (30 days stablization among other things). So... folks have pointed out a benefit to using --as-needed. The=20 benefit itself doesn't seem particularly in dispute, analyze the=20 fallout from it- if the best that is offered is "the spec says=20 otherwise", screw the spec frankly- a .01% breakage w/ 99.99% pkgs=20 getting a positive gain is a strong argument for doing exemptions=20 where needed. Basically, pull out the stats of the breakage. There is *always* risk=20 in changes (new gcc, new bash breaking paludis/portage, etc), someone=20 kindly come back w/ stats backing their specific viewpoint. Arguing over the spec at this point isn't going anywhere, so just=20 drop it. ~harring --A6N2fC+uXW/VQSAv Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFIQK1bsiLx3HvNzgcRAkBAAJ476WWW9ofcXIwXEoFh7IsT0mPKJgCgjNkV G78465Y8ZaeFd1Ig4TP6HmE= =mf+h -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --A6N2fC+uXW/VQSAv-- -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list