From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7092A1396D9 for ; Thu, 12 Oct 2017 10:57:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6E2C22BC039; Thu, 12 Oct 2017 10:57:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [IPv6:2001:470:ea4a:1:5054:ff:fec7:86e4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 22AC4E0C09 for ; Thu, 12 Oct 2017 10:57:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from sf (host81-129-87-185.range81-129.btcentralplus.com [81.129.87.185]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: slyfox) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1349733BEC7 for ; Thu, 12 Oct 2017 10:57:01 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2017 11:56:57 +0100 From: Sergei Trofimovich To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Checking if a package respects LDFLAGS Message-ID: <20171012115657.5d76b6ab@sf> In-Reply-To: <1506841339.842.0.camel@gentoo.org> References: <9cc45a33-5f8d-8bec-123c-7f9c9bba77e5@gentoo.org> <2057250.trt0U4FxbA@porto> <1506841339.842.0.camel@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.15.1-dirty (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) 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; boundary="Sig_/_MU0jWdNDlPT6fI1pxbGLbh"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: cf70d7e1-211a-46b4-8af7-c025d93e3bca X-Archives-Hash: d6afdd7ca2ee42dc7a886d0d4c4cb225 --Sig_/_MU0jWdNDlPT6fI1pxbGLbh Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, 01 Oct 2017 09:02:19 +0200 Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny wrote: > W dniu sob, 30.09.2017 o godzinie 21=E2=88=B649=E2=80=89+0000, u=C5=BCytk= ownik Robin H. > Johnson napisa=C5=82: > > On Sat, Sep 30, 2017 at 08:05:50PM +0200, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: =20 > > > Am Samstag, 30. September 2017, 19:03:59 CEST schrieb Keri Harris: =20 > > > > Hi, > > > >=20 > > > > Is there a recommended method for testing if a package respects LDF= LAGS? > > > >=20 > > > > Arch testers are encouraged to add -Wl,--hash-style=3Dgnu to LDFLAGS > > > > [1],[2] and portage uses scanelf to check for .hash sections. Howev= er it > > > > appears that ld defaults to using a .gnu.hash section: =20 > > >=20 > > > That test used to work, but it's broken now. We need a new one. =20 > >=20 > > How about something similar to Fedora's binary annotations work, or > > injecting a .note.gentoo section into binaries (containing literal > > C/CXX/LDFLAGS would be useful). > > =20 >=20 > Portage team is always happy to accept any patch for this. Tracking bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/455232 --=20 Sergei --Sig_/_MU0jWdNDlPT6fI1pxbGLbh Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: Цифровая подпись OpenPGP -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iF0EARECAB0WIQSZKa0VG5avZRlY01hxoe52YR/zqgUCWd9KeQAKCRBxoe52YR/z qhVLAJwOExahojBnuYlG+fIN2HRj2kk0JACfRthOjiBRTYpGnuAMPpnUXreP8e4= =IZ86 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/_MU0jWdNDlPT6fI1pxbGLbh--