Re: [gentoo-dev] Proliferation of IUSE=static-libs in Gentoo

[James Le Cuirot <chewi@gentoo.org>]

On Mon, 12 Mar 2018 13:53:34 +0000
Andrey Utkin <andrey_utkin@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 05:57:35PM +0100, Jeroen Roovers wrote:
> > On Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:40:44 +0100
> > Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >   
> > > As part of that we also shouldn't deliver static libraries  
> > 
> > OK, so you want to absolutely kill dead the only current sane way
> > for developers who use Gentoo to ship static binaries to their
> > users' target systems? Drive them away to another Linux distro that
> > does support being the build platform that they need? Or force
> > everyone to use EXTRA_ECONF"--enable-static" and hope for them that
> > it works for all packages? All just because static linking
> > *between* ebuilds is bad?  
> 
> This is close to my current case. Trying (in my own time) to build a
> (hopefully elegant) demo setup of Gentoo & crossdev with static libs
> enabled, to present as an alternative to CentOS which is currently the
> build env at my job (and static linkage is the way the product is
> built now). I run into cross-compilation problems when I enable
> USE=static-libs to any extent, despite the comment in Gentoo's fake
> /usr/lib64/*.so files saying "And yes, this works in the cross-
> compiling scenario as the sysroot-ed linker will prepend the real
> path". But it's what I'd rather have resolved than have no
> USE=static-libs at all.

libtool often screws up relinking unless --with-sysroot is passed to
configure, which is something we're adding for EAPI 7. I need to take a
closer look at those fake .so files to see whether anything more needs
to be done.

-- 
James Le Cuirot (chewi)
Gentoo Linux Developer