On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 11:10:22AM -0500, Bill Vermillion wrote:
> I had wanted to build static binaries in /bin and /sbin - so
> I set NO_SHARED. The man pages says "... this can be bad. If set
> every utility that uses bsd.prog.mk will be linked statically."
Have you tried NO_DYNAMICROOT? It's
Deep in the forest in the dark of night on Sat, Jan 27, 2007 at 19:23
with a cackle and an evil grin Scot Hetzel cast another eye of
newt into the brew and chanted:
> On 1/27/07, Bill Vermillion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >No real problem there, but that brings up another question.
> >If - as d
On 1/27/07, Bill Vermillion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
No real problem there, but that brings up another question.
If - as documented in make.conf(5) - I put use the variable
NO_DYNAMIC_ROOT it says "set this is you do not want to link
/bin and /sbin dynamically".
Would that be the way to build
Even though on Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 11:15 Dan Nelson
realized that everything he says should be taken 'cum grano salis',
he unhesitatingly continued with this missive:
Took me awhile to get some time to try this again - wjv
> In the last episode (Jan 26), Bill Vermillion said:
> > I had wanted
In the last episode (Jan 26), Bill Vermillion said:
> I had wanted to build static binaries in /bin and /sbin - so
> I set NO_SHARED. The man pages says "... this can be bad. If set
> every utility that uses bsd.prog.mk will be linked statically."
>
> Here is the tail end of the output of make bu
On 1/26/07, Bill Vermillion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I had wanted to build static binaries in /bin and /sbin - so
I set NO_SHARED. The man pages says "... this can be bad. If set
every utility that uses bsd.prog.mk will be linked statically."
I have problems in the past - on other platforms -
