Bug#554695: FTBFS with binutils-gold

2009-11-10 Thread Helge Kreutzmann
Hello Peter, On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 12:31:36AM +0100, Peter Fritzsche wrote: 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

Bug#554695: FTBFS with binutils-gold

2009-11-10 Thread Peter Fritzsche
Helge Kreutzmann wrote: [...] From what I've gathered from here, you introduced a new linker and found that it does not link many programmes linking with the standard linker. I haven't heard of it before, nor was it mentioned as (possible) release goal (IIRC, correction welcome). And about the

Bug#554695: FTBFS with binutils-gold

2009-11-10 Thread Helge Kreutzmann
tags 554695 + upstream thanks Hello Peter, On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 06:36:00PM +0100, Peter Fritzsche wrote: Correct. It is not a release goal, but the linker can be (misused) to show some common failures when linking programs. So it is more a QA bug - if you want to change it to wishlist

Bug#554695: FTBFS with binutils-gold

2009-11-10 Thread Helge Kreutzmann
Hello Peter, On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 06:36:00PM +0100, Peter Fritzsche wrote: Correct. It is not a release goal, but the linker can be (misused) to show some common failures when linking programs. So it is more a QA bug - if you want to change it to wishlist then do it. In your case it is

Bug#554695: FTBFS with binutils-gold

2009-11-10 Thread Peter Fritzsche
Helge Kreutzmann wrote: On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 06:36:00PM +0100, Peter Fritzsche wrote: Correct. It is not a release goal, but the linker can be (misused) to show some common failures when linking programs. So it is more a QA bug - if you want to change it to wishlist then do it. In your