Diego Biurrun <di...@biurrun.de> writes: > On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 02:42:16AM +0100, Måns Rullgård wrote: >> Diego Biurrun <di...@biurrun.de> writes: >> >> > On Fri, Jul 08, 2011 at 06:15:29PM +0100, Måns Rullgård wrote: >> >> Diego Biurrun <di...@biurrun.de> writes: >> >> > >> >> > --- a/Makefile >> >> > +++ b/Makefile >> >> > @@ -124,11 +124,10 @@ TOOLS := $(TOOLS:%=tools/%$(EXESUF)) >> >> > >> >> > -tools/%$(EXESUF): tools/%.o >> >> > +tools/%$(EXESUF): tools/%.o $(FF_DEP_LIBS) >> >> > $(LD) $(FF_LDFLAGS) -o $@ $< $(FF_EXTRALIBS) >> >> >> >> This is not true. Most of the things in tools/ have no dependencies at >> >> all on the libs. >> > >> > It seems my patch was misunderstood - I did not intend to introduce >> > correct library dependencies for the binaries in the tools directory. >> > >> > The intention was to >> > >> > a) restore .d file generation in tools/ and >> > b) not try to link binaries below tools/ before the libraries used >> > in the link command have been built. >> > >> > Now it is true that not all binaries in the tools subdirectory depend >> > on libav* libs, however, we do use them in the linker command line, >> > before and after my patch. >> > >> > Thankfully the linker is smart and figures out which libraries are >> > required and which are not and only links the required ones into the >> > final binary. However, the libraries mentioned on the command line >> > must already have been built. >> >> That is not true in general for shared libs. > > Let's keep the discussion on topic please. The topic is the patch I > proposed. Currently we have $(FF_EXTRALIBS) on the linker command line, > so $(FF_DEP_LIBS) have to be built first. That is all my patch does. > Nothing is changed wrt to linking or binary dependencies.
So the command is wrong as is, and you are making it worse. -- Måns Rullgård m...@mansr.com _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list libav-devel@libav.org https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
