On 13-06-2007 12:08:49 +0200, Michael Haubenwallner wrote: > On Tue, 2007-06-12 at 11:20 +0200, Fabian Groffen wrote: > > 1) the patch was reverted, because there is no CVS header in the patch, > > so my update script can't do anything but making it the same as the main > > tree version, in this case overwriting the differences > > 2) I tried applying the patch, but it failed to apply somehow > > 3) the patch adds some GNU binutils specific linker stuff AFAICT, so > > maybe it is better to apply it for the archs we use the GNU linker > > with instead of not applying it for the archs we don't use it? > > Agreed, but > > 4) Some native linkers (hpux fex.) do have soname support, but with > different argument (+h for hpux), not '-soname'. > And we cannot use GNU ld on hpux. > > Maybe ldwrapper should map "-soname=name" to "+h name" for hpux once, > and for aix/darwin, just drop "-soname=name" ?
How tricky would it be to do this? Can it go wrong? With the modular setup of the ldwrapper it is completely instance specific of course... How much other things can we "solve" this way? hmmm.... -- Fabian Groffen Gentoo on a different level -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
