Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 11:05:40AM +0100, Peter Fritzsche wrote:
> > Source: pari
> > Version: 2.3.4-2
> > Severity: minor
> > User: peter.fritzs...@gmx.de
> > Usertags: no-add-needed
> >
> > Tried to build your package and it fails to build with GNU binutils-gold.
> > The important difference is that --no-add-needed is the default behavior
> > of of GNU binutils-gold. Please provide all needed libraries to the
> > linker when building your executables.
> >
> > More informations can be found at
> >
> > http://wiki.debian.org/qa.debian.org/FTBFS#A2009-11-02Packagesfailingbeca
> >usebinutils-gold.2BAC8-indirectlinking
>
> Hello Peter,
> Thanks for the report, and I agree with the issue (I forgot plotport used
> libm).
>
> However I am slightly concerned that this policy is opposite to another one
> that say to never link binaries against library they do not use directly,
> to avoid spurious dependencies.
> Of course the two policies are complementary, but I am afraid that fixing
> packages to link with gold will lead maintainers to link with more
> libraries than strictly required (because it is not always obvious) and to
> add spurious dependencies to packages.
To explain it further. The policy says something like: Hey, don't link to
libxyz when you arent using it. And binutils-gold says.. hey link to libabc if
you are using it. So it is completely unrelated.
> So it would be best if both checks were consolidated somehow into a single
> one with the exact list of library to add.
Building with binutils-gold and checking output of dpkg-shlibdeps is the exact
test you suggests.
Best regards,
Peter
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
