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 1L17mA-0007c0-IB for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 14 Nov 2008 23:08:30 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 203D6E021D; Fri, 14 Nov 2008 23:07:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB2C6E021D for ; Fri, 14 Nov 2008 23:07:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from 0x3ef266d2.svgnxx4.dynamic.dsl.tele.dk (0x3ef266d2.svgnxx4.dynamic.dsl.tele.dk [62.242.102.210]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AB09643B8 for ; Fri, 14 Nov 2008 23:07:34 +0000 (UTC) From: Peter Alfredsen To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Please review: function epunt_la_files for eutils.eclass Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2008 00:05:52 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 References: <200811091704.10291.loki_val@gentoo.org> <200811121831.49814.loki_val@gentoo.org> <20081113221413.71edadab@halo.dirtyepic.sk.ca> In-Reply-To: <20081113221413.71edadab@halo.dirtyepic.sk.ca> 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; boundary="nextPart14607635.bCQFeRNQTM"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200811150005.54423.loki_val@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 934b53b5-3393-4450-8cc7-2e062daafa9f X-Archives-Hash: 4a31eb0b765ad4d77f02e580e0575586 --nextPart14607635.bCQFeRNQTM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Friday 14 November 2008, Ryan Hill wrote: > > [Snip more pie-in-the-sky] > > > > Show me the code, please. =C2=A0 > > 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=20 libtool .la files would take some weekends to do, when this problem has=20 existed for so long, yet noone has been able to fix it in a way that=20 causes less pain than removal of all .la files does. IOW, I will=20 believe promises of code when I see it. I won't be touching libtool. You can break that thing by just looking at=20 it the wrong way. It'll eval your buttocks off and expr your behind,=20 it's .3 MB of all posix-sh and it will make you regret you ever tried=20 to wrap your head around it. [in re pulseaudio, I believed the news for 0.9.1=20 http://www.pulseaudio.org/wiki/OldNews] [Responding to the rest of the thread] I've given this some thought and I think I've been convinced that=20 dberkholz' position is probably the most tenable. If this is to be=20 done, we should do it in a documented "Gentooish" way. The problem with=20 going down the FEATURES road are two-fold: 1) What should the behavior of the FEATURES flag be? I think it should act like an INSTALL_MASK=3D"*.la" and=20 EXTRA_ECONF=3D"--disable-static" There should also be a function, let's call it "exemptthis.la" that=20 would exempt a .la file from being punted, so the RESTRICT could be=20 made on a per-la file basis. 2) Who implements in portage? [...I know nothing of portage internals...] 3) Grunt work? This should be rather easy. Just assign the bugs to me and I shall add=20 RESTRICTs as-needed. But the problem is that we've known about this for aeons and nothing has=20 been done about it. Diego tried to do something with popt and another=20 package some time ago (bug 218286) but he was mostly shouted down and=20 nobody touched it since. On .so bumps I've silently dropped .la files, which I think is the more=20 gradualistic approach and it also has the advantage of causing only=20 little or no (extra) breakage, but for the whole tree it could take=20 decades, since some libs don't do .so bumps.=20 Anyway, we really need to start punting .la files one way or the other.=20 =46or desktop users of our distro, they do a lot more harm than good. For=20 embedded, perhaps static linking serves some purpose, but really, if=20 you can't afford dynamic linking, what are you going to run on your=20 board? =2D-=20 /PA --nextPart14607635.bCQFeRNQTM Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAkkeBFIACgkQtEGUx4TfHiQVcwCfee1JY0iFe1y2FtmWK7jpx/YF e64Anj9ehJkX3A/b0qZ5P57xaeBZUKrv =boxQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart14607635.bCQFeRNQTM--