From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 264CB138010 for ; Thu, 11 Oct 2012 20:40:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5E9E921C004; Thu, 11 Oct 2012 20:40:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from malth.us (malth.us [75.147.143.249]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A147E0511 for ; Thu, 11 Oct 2012 20:39:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by malth.us (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8966740CA3A7; Thu, 11 Oct 2012 13:39:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at malth.us Received: from malth.us ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (malth.us [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0KhWqlbel-Qd; Thu, 11 Oct 2012 13:39:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.175] (moneypit.hq [192.168.0.175]) by malth.us (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AA97B40CA51E; Thu, 11 Oct 2012 13:39:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <50772E86.4000600@malth.us> Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 13:39:34 -0700 From: "Gregory M. Turner" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120907 Thunderbird/15.0.1 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 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org CC: Mike Frysinger Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH/RFC] eclass/flag-o-matic.eclass: prepend-ldpath References: <506F9C61.3020500@malth.us> <201210110014.46901.vapier@gentoo.org> <507692D9.3060909@malth.us> <201210111150.49497.vapier@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <201210111150.49497.vapier@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: bf6edd9c-c2f7-41a0-ace8-912a7536ca58 X-Archives-Hash: 596f49f0c6cdd0c6d98fdf2fab3d7c84 On 10/11/2012 8:50 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Thursday 11 October 2012 05:35:21 Gregory M. Turner wrote: >> On 10/10/2012 9:14 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > it's not particularly important, but on one hand, the LDFLAGS parsing logic > should not be in the tree ever. I've no major attachment to it. Took all of five minutes to code up reading the ld manpage, and as you pointed out, it's probably solving a non-problem. > on the other, i can stomach much smaller one- > off hacks like prepending -L. to LDFLAGS if the maintainers of the python > ebuild really really want to add it. If fixing the python builds proves too onerous then this is what I'll end up filing a bug for. > my [limited] understanding of the prefix compiler is that they wrap things with > a custom shell script to inject -L flags behind the back of the compiler at the > very last possible minute and point to the right place. Pretty fuzzy on this myself. Whatever binutils-config does works so well I've never had to look into it very deeply :) Above, however, I'm referring to the prefix-specific cpython patch-sets, where I was "sure" I'd seen patches to project LDFLAGS into setup.py's compiler invocation tables. But it seems I was mistaken. Perhaps it was in the main gentoo-patches after all... or maybe I just need more coffee... Anyhow one thing I have figured out is how things can work correctly on Linux wihtout -L.: on Linux, the python plugins aren't actually linked against libpython.so! With any luck, this explains what's going on and suggests that platforms linking python modules against libpython.so just need to wedge -L${S} somewhere in configure.in, possibly do-able via sed script (unless we end up having to mess with setup.py, in which case, things may get a bit more complicated). -gmt