On (02/03/12 08:12), James Limbouris wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] > > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > > Of Khem Raj > > Sent: Friday, 2 March 2012 3:56 PM > > To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer > > Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] gdk-pixbuf: Pick up ${NM} from the > > environment. > > > > > It is more than set in the environment - the configure script spits out > > > two > > messages about it before hitting this macro. > > > So, I think the check is entirely extraneous. > > > > > > > if you can point that there is another check which makes this one > > redundant thats a different issue and then your patch is ok. but I doubt > > thats the case > > > > > I have seen this issue patched out in other gnome packages, some in oe- > > core. > > > At least one was marked Upstream-Status: Inappropriate [configuration], > > and one marked Pending. > > > So I got the idea that upstream was not interested... > > > > usually such patches are taken status may be too conservative > > > > Here is the fragment from the configure script, with the patch applied. > Sorry, it's quite long: > > { $as_echo "$as_me:${as_lineno-$LINENO}: checking for BSD- or MS-compatible > name lister (nm)" >&5 > $as_echo_n "checking for BSD- or MS-compatible name lister (nm)... " >&6; } > if ${lt_cv_path_NM+:} false; then : > $as_echo_n "(cached) " >&6 > else > if test -n "$NM"; then > # Let the user override the test. > lt_cv_path_NM="$NM" > else > lt_nm_to_check="${ac_tool_prefix}nm" > if test -n "$ac_tool_prefix" && test "$build" = "$host"; then > lt_nm_to_check="$lt_nm_to_check nm" > fi > for lt_tmp_nm in $lt_nm_to_check; do > lt_save_ifs="$IFS"; IFS=$PATH_SEPARATOR > for ac_dir in $PATH /usr/ccs/bin/elf /usr/ccs/bin /usr/ucb /bin; do > IFS="$lt_save_ifs" > test -z "$ac_dir" && ac_dir=. > tmp_nm="$ac_dir/$lt_tmp_nm" > if test -f "$tmp_nm" || test -f "$tmp_nm$ac_exeext" ; then > # Check to see if the nm accepts a BSD-compat flag. > # Adding the `sed 1q' prevents false positives on HP-UX, which says: > # nm: unknown option "B" ignored > # Tru64's nm complains that /dev/null is an invalid object file > case `"$tmp_nm" -B /dev/null 2>&1 | sed '1q'` in > */dev/null* | *'Invalid file or object type'*) > lt_cv_path_NM="$tmp_nm -B" > break > ;; > *) > case `"$tmp_nm" -p /dev/null 2>&1 | sed '1q'` in > */dev/null*) > lt_cv_path_NM="$tmp_nm -p" > break > ;; > *) > lt_cv_path_NM=${lt_cv_path_NM="$tmp_nm"} # keep the first match, but > continue # so that we can try to find one that supports BSD flags > ;; > esac > ;; > esac > fi > done > IFS="$lt_save_ifs" > done > : ${lt_cv_path_NM=no} > fi > fi > { $as_echo "$as_me:${as_lineno-$LINENO}: result: $lt_cv_path_NM" >&5 > $as_echo "$lt_cv_path_NM" >&6; } > if test "$lt_cv_path_NM" != "no"; then > NM="$lt_cv_path_NM" > else > # Didn't find any BSD compatible name lister, look for dumpbin. > if test -n "$DUMPBIN"; then : > # Let the user override the test. > else > if test -n "$ac_tool_prefix"; then > for ac_prog in dumpbin "link -dump" > do > # Extract the first word of "$ac_tool_prefix$ac_prog", so it can be a > program name with args. > set dummy $ac_tool_prefix$ac_prog; ac_word=$2 > { $as_echo "$as_me:${as_lineno-$LINENO}: checking for $ac_word" >&5 > $as_echo_n "checking for $ac_word... " >&6; } > if ${ac_cv_prog_DUMPBIN+:} false; then : > $as_echo_n "(cached) " >&6 > else > if test -n "$DUMPBIN"; then > ac_cv_prog_DUMPBIN="$DUMPBIN" # Let the user override the test. > else > as_save_IFS=$IFS; IFS=$PATH_SEPARATOR > for as_dir in $PATH > do > IFS=$as_save_IFS > test -z "$as_dir" && as_dir=. > for ac_exec_ext in '' $ac_executable_extensions; do > if { test -f "$as_dir/$ac_word$ac_exec_ext" && $as_test_x > "$as_dir/$ac_word$ac_exec_ext"; }; then > ac_cv_prog_DUMPBIN="$ac_tool_prefix$ac_prog" > $as_echo "$as_me:${as_lineno-$LINENO}: found > $as_dir/$ac_word$ac_exec_ext" >&5 > break 2 > fi > done > done > IFS=$as_save_IFS > > > I believe this code is generated by libtool, in ./m4/libtool.m4. > I have _no_ idea how libtool works, or fits in with autotools, so I'm not too > sure whether AC_CHECK_TOOLS makes sense here or not. > I'm happy to resubmit and/or file a bugzilla report with Gnome. >
Please resubmit _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
