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 1Oj7Kj-0004Co-IL for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 11 Aug 2010 09:10:49 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 435CCE0BB9; Wed, 11 Aug 2010 09:10:43 +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 C5219E0B03 for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2010 09:10:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wyf28 with SMTP id 28so8227153wyf.40 for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2010 02:10:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:sender:date:from:to:cc :subject:message-id:references:mime-version:content-type :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=Eb6YX1GCWkBlcP3QJqb9DFeoqc02Z5jI/sfY1IQpnTo=; b=ASJlURBQuNbgMlJME2gD8F/T+jAPUFOTV5/rdkleYLyxeyBEZfpFX0f6tGQ4co0m17 lgBhMMPMEYozYX5+llSDHEjbIZ39hbdo5zjNZOJ22j9flioTnrrVELhRBWRyMXlGh4JJ UDRWyZuy9WI1JuD6gYnDXGJiBqr1/Z/h89r4s= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=SBls07yL5kjtvwkuQJcXQZyLP+59zGEI2zd5XYThpk1V1OnzL6JiCeJymF2of6fgYK dUgVq7r2wFfS0ljbV/HsXEjpyKrmJfhXkUeLW1ykBK93fb1CDzgxWwGgKPBeGjGbcgmQ 50sHTxUiBUPNrx6+HgZwwapMDx7+7eIG9VHNE= Received: by 10.216.158.80 with SMTP id p58mr16363917wek.44.1281517827117; Wed, 11 Aug 2010 02:10:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Mystical (178.128.37.41.dsl.dyn.forthnet.gr [178.128.37.41]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id j1sm3922087wej.15.2010.08.11.02.10.23 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 11 Aug 2010 02:10:25 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Markos Chandras Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2010 12:11:38 +0300 From: Markos Chandras To: Mike Frysinger Cc: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org, qa@gentoo.org Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: Add --hash-style=gnu to LDFLAGS Message-ID: <20100811091138.GA19768@Mystical> References: <20100807163230.GA31575@Mystical> <1281201535.29176.45.camel@yamato.local> <20100810215352.GA7980@Mystical> 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="vtzGhvizbBRQ85DL" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Archives-Salt: 9034354f-c081-4d49-b066-37abc799efcf X-Archives-Hash: 8fe1bee11f879c31274716f4b77a1953 --vtzGhvizbBRQ85DL Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 06:31:52PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 5:53 PM, Markos Chandras wrote: > >> 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? > > > > I would really really *really* appreciated if our beloved arch testers = ( at least for linux amd64/x86 > > because they are the first who stabilize a package ) make this default > > on their build boxes. >=20 > sounds like someone needs to update/extend the arch testing > documentation. random e-mails posted to random dev lists are quickly > forgotten. new arch testers however should be reading the arch tester > documnt. > I will update the guide for amd64 HT and I will strongly advice the rest of the arches to do that as well. Using my QA powerzzz I will be quite strict =66rom now on with arches making such stabilizations. > > It is annoying to mark a package stable when it has *clear* QA problems. >=20 > please dont blow this out of proportion. two points: > - stabilizing newer versions of a package when there is no QA > regression is fine. Fair enough, still those QA need fixing. The fact that these QA probs are n= ot regressions doesn't mean it is ok to ignore them > - ignoring LDFLAGS, while incorrect, is rarely going to lead to > broken packages being emerged on end users' systems. ignoring > CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS however is much more likely to result in problems for > end users when working with multilib or cross builds. > -mike Of course. Respecting any *FLAGS is vital and definitely ony of the many reasons we use Gentoo. --=20 Markos Chandras (hwoarang) Gentoo Linux Developer Web: http://hwoarang.silverarrow.org Key ID: 441AC410 Key FP: AAD0 8591 E3CD 445D 6411 3477 F7F7 1E8E 441A C410 --vtzGhvizbBRQ85DL Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkxiaUoACgkQ9/cejkQaxBCP3gCaA9wAiYoYbLDTdrGZw3aDydge LfAAn2u74qrYxlxwFLC3hR6Oad650Mg6 =zXjL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --vtzGhvizbBRQ85DL--