On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:03:22 +0400 Maxim Koltsov <maksbo...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 2012/6/17 Justin <j...@gentoo.org>:
> > On 17.06.2012 15:23, Maxim Koltsov wrote:
> >> 2012/6/17 Justin <j...@gentoo.org>:
> >>> On 17.06.2012 14:13, Maxim Koltsov wrote:
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>> During prefix bootstrap i noticed that strip-flags removes -L
> >>>> and -I flags from *FLAGS while these flags are essential for
> >>>> prefix bootstrapping. Therefore i propose a fix for strip-flags
> >>>> function to
> >>>
> >>> Is this really necessary? I never experienced any problems which
> >>> need this when following the guides. I looks like a hack, because
> >>> something else is borked.
> >>
> >> I've just hit binutils on OpenBSD not finding libdl.so installed in
> >> $EPREFIX/usr/lib/ because of this.
> >> Don't tell me that OpenBSD prefix is unsupported, i'm working on
> >> getting it supported.
> >>
> >
> > I am still not convinced. libdl.so is provided by glibc, at least
> > on my linux system. And glibc is one of the rare packages which
> > needs to be provided by the host system instead of being installed
> > in the prefix.
> >
> > Is there something different on BSD which makes libdl.so appear
> > inside the prefix?
>
> At least on OpenBSD dlopen() is not in libdl.so, but in ld.so itself,
> so I have to install dummy libdl.so to ${EPREFIX}/usr/lib.
> I think we should use Fabian's solution from the bug, if it does not
> cause any unwanted consequences.
Shouldn't configure detect that no libdl is necessary?
--
Best regards,
Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
