On 23/04/12 09:49, Stephan Bergmann wrote: > On 04/22/2012 10:51 PM, David Ostrovsky wrote: >> your patch was still not pushed. >> >> So we have two options here: >> 1. push your patch (I attached it with description ;-) >> 2. use make interactive variable LDFLAGS, a lá make >> LDFLAGS='-Wl,--no-as-needed' check >> >> Any ideas on this? > > I still do not see why we need the two different libraries at all, > smoketest (from smoketest/Library_smoketest.mk) and smoketest_test (from > smoketest/CppunitTest_smoketest.mk), both containing the exact same > CppUnit test code.
me neither, but i guess shipping the thing produced by CppunitTest currently doesn't work because the RPATH is wrong, and furthermore i don't really get the point of shipping cppunittests anyway. > If we want the feature of > <http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=8c478c911033243df90ba290b32732a1fd70130e> > > > "create installation set for tests" and produce the CppUnit test code > library not only for direct consumption in the CppunitTest_*.mk > makefile, but also for inclusion in installation sets, then we should > probably make solenv/gbuild/CppunitTest.mk more flexible, so that > CppUnit test libraries need not necessarily built directly in their > CppunitTest_*.mk. well i don't think complicating the gbuild core for this rather bizarre special case is a good idea; if anything i'd first investigate whether just changing the RPATH for Cppunittests and shipping the Cppunit_smoketest instead of the ordinary Library_smoketest fixes things up so everybody is happy? _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
