is still pulled
in at run-time recursively. (And as those are dependencies of the
dependencies, they are installed anyway, so no benefits at installation
time).
> Package maintainers can surely track problems to --as-needed if that's the
> case and here we have hope because many packa
Someone referenced an earlier thread about --as-needed, I suggest you read that.
In addition, Gentoo has some documentation about it:
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/qa/asneeded.xml
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ
On Sat, 11 Feb 2012 11:38:23 Paul Wise wrote:
> The --as-needed flag is a workaround for buggy upstream build systems,
> IMO it should not be used unless the relevant build systems will not
> be fixed any time soon.
Seems like a typical case with GNOME project stuff.
Do you know if
On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 23:15:22 Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> I personally strongly recommend against using --as-needed unless you
> understand very well what it does. It may change the runtime behaviour of a
> program without any signs at link time.
Surely it's a powerful thing which
Paul Wise writes:
> The --as-needed flag is a workaround for buggy upstream build systems,
> IMO it should not be used unless the relevant build systems will not be
> fixed any time soon.
Which in most cases they won't be. Hell, I'm an upstream maintainer for
one case where
The --as-needed flag is a workaround for buggy upstream build systems,
IMO it should not be used unless the relevant build systems will not
be fixed any time soon.
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject
Dmitry Smirnov writes:
> I seek your advice regarding the best practice with using --as-needed.
> Recently I tried to convince two package maintainers to use --as-needed
> in order to reduce overlinking. Surprisingly this time this idea was
> opposed with great resistance as none of
* Dmitry Smirnov [120210 07:18]:
> Because in their eyes I have neither expertise nor reputation I couldn't
> convince them that benefits are outweight risks. (--as-needed removes dozen of
> packages from Depends)
>
> I've been asked to provide a document or a quote fr
* Stephen M. Webb , 2012-02-10, 07:12:
I seek your advice regarding the best practice with using --as-needed.
The --as--needed flag is automatically added to package builds in
Ubuntu. If you do not want your package to fail to build from source
(and thus not be included in the Ubuntu GNU/Linux
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/10/2012 01:17 AM, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> Dear mentors,
>
> I seek your advice regarding the best practice with using
> --as-needed.
The --as--needed flag is automatically added to package builds in
Ubuntu. If you do not want you
Dear mentors,
I seek your advice regarding the best practice with using --as-needed.
Recently I tried to convince two package maintainers to use --as-needed in
order to reduce overlinking. Surprisingly this time this idea was opposed with
great resistance as none of maintainers but me had
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 03:12:35PM +, Tony Houghton wrote:
> On 17/11/10 13:47, Roger Leigh wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 01:34:21PM +, Tony Houghton wrote:
>>> How should one add --as-needed linker flags to an autotools-based
>>> package? I ended up adding C
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 01:34:21PM +, Tony Houghton wrote:
> How should one add --as-needed linker flags to an autotools-based
> package? I ended up adding CFLAGS=-Wl,--as-needed to my
> dh_auto_configure parameters but is it OK to just overwrite CFLAGS like
> that, or should I a
How should one add --as-needed linker flags to an autotools-based
package? I ended up adding CFLAGS=-Wl,--as-needed to my
dh_auto_configure parameters but is it OK to just overwrite CFLAGS like
that, or should I add it to any existing CFLAGS?
BTW, at first I tried LDFLAGS=--as-needed but
2008/8/22 Bas Wijnen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> --as-needed will let the linker throw away all symbols that aren't used.
> It always does this when linking static libraries. That's why with
> those, it's important that they're in the right order. The same is true
&
On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 09:44:52PM +0200, Jeffrey Ratcliffe wrote:
> >> I've tried using --as-needed, but ocropus then FTBFS.
>
> http://paste.debian.net/15317/
--as-needed will let the linker throw away all symbols that aren't used.
It always does this when linking stat
2008/6/12 Raphael Geissert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> did you update your chroot? gcc in sid is 4.3, in lenny is 4.2.
Duh... I assumed that gcc-4.3 had been in sid for more than the week
since I last updated my chroot. Thanks.
Jeff
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "u
Jeffrey Ratcliffe wrote:
...
> that defaulted to 4.2.4-1. Why didn't I get 4.3? How do I force 4.3 in
> the sid pbuilder?
did you update your chroot? gcc in sid is 4.3, in lenny is 4.2.
To force it, in your .pbuilderrc (I've never tried by using them directly on
the shell):
EXTRAPACKAGES="gcc-4.
2008/6/8 Cyril Brulebois <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> It might be interesting to use a debug build, and share the backtraces,
> so that one can check whether that's the same bug, when the segfault
> happens.
Below is the backtrace from tesseract built with gcc-4.2 and
--as-needed.
On 08/06/2008, Jeffrey Ratcliffe wrote:
> I uploaded tesseract-ocr 2.03-1 with --as-needed, but have had this
> bug reported:
>
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=484052
>
> i.e. the test case in the bug report segfaults if tesseract is
> compiled with gcc
2008/4/29 Cyril Brulebois <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> You could try and use LDFLAGS to pass -Wl,--as-needed (linker flags).
> But since it could break silently some parts of your build, it shouldn't
> be used without -Wl,-z,defs which will help spot possible missing -l$foo
>
[Richard Laager]
> If I follow those steps, I'm making a bunch of changes in the source
> directory of the package, which creates a big diff [1]. Is that
> really the best way? Should I instead run those commands as part of
> the package build process?
I do this stuff at build time.[1]
Many peop
On Mon, 2006-10-30 at 19:30 +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2005/11/msg00016.html
>
> In short:
> - First try the relibtoolize approach.
I'll start by admitting I don't know much about the autotools.
I took a look at this URL:
http://people.debian.org/
On Mon, Oct 30, 2006 at 12:07:52PM -0600, Richard Laager wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-10-30 at 14:31 +0200, Damyan Ivanov wrote:
> >* Added --as-needed to LDFLAGS to avoid unnecessary NEEDED entries.
> > Thanks to Christian 'Greek0' Aichinger.
> Is the use of --as-n
Richard Laager wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-10-30 at 14:31 +0200, Damyan Ivanov wrote:
>>* Added --as-needed to LDFLAGS to avoid unnecessary NEEDED entries.
>> Thanks to Christian 'Greek0' Aichinger.
>
> Is the use of --as-needed encouraged/discouraged in Debian?
On Mon, 2006-10-30 at 14:31 +0200, Damyan Ivanov wrote:
>* Added --as-needed to LDFLAGS to avoid unnecessary NEEDED entries.
> Thanks to Christian 'Greek0' Aichinger.
Is the use of --as-needed encouraged/discouraged in Debian? Is there a
reason this isn't used sy
26 matches
Mail list logo
