I still can't see any updates in the guideline, what should we do for
this kind of case? Still allow no ldflag macro inserted?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct:
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, 21 Oct 2013 04:01:15 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
We already have one, it's called %{__global_ldflags}. You are indeed
supposed to set LDFLAGS of handwritten makefiles to that. The guidelines
need to be
On 10/22/2013 10:26 AM, Ville Skyttä wrote:
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, 21 Oct 2013 04:01:15 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
We already have one, it's called %{__global_ldflags}. You are indeed
supposed to set LDFLAGS of handwritten makefiles
On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 11:26:18 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote:
In many cases the values aren't picked up from the environment but
need to be passed in by other means (such as arguments to make etc).
Okay. make -e … could be run in that case as a work-around. But
overriding Makefile variables
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com wrote:
Better would be that
the Makefile inherits from values passed in via Make or the env.
Sure.
%configure || :
[...]
To repeat from the earlier reply, one may want to take precautions,
so when a future upgrade adds
On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 14:06:33 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote:
IMHO adding precaution cruft like [ -f configure ] exit -1 [...]
is a sign of the packager doing package updates too carelessly if
(s)he doesn't even trust oneself or others to check if the upstream
build system has changed between
On Sun, 2013-10-20 at 23:42 +0200, Till Maas wrote:
Hi,
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines?rd=Packaging/Guidelines#Compiler_flags
mentions only %optflags to be required for packages but I noticed that
%configure sets LDFLAGS to a value different than %optflags:
As noted
Am 22.10.2013 16:47, schrieb Adam Jackson:
On Sun, 2013-10-20 at 23:42 +0200, Till Maas wrote:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines?rd=Packaging/Guidelines#Compiler_flags
mentions only %optflags to be required for packages but I noticed that
%configure sets LDFLAGS to a value
Michael Schwendt wrote:
Agreed. It's a trade-off. Guards aren't bad, but in this case their
benefit is questionable. It probably doesn't work completely anyway, since
if the build framework uses Autotools, there likely are no pregenerated
Makefiles, and only a successful run on the configure
On Mon, 21 Oct 2013 04:01:15 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Till Maas wrote:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines?rd=Packaging/Guidelines#Compiler_flags
mentions only %optflags to be required for packages but I noticed that
%configure sets LDFLAGS to a value different than
Hi,
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines?rd=Packaging/Guidelines#Compiler_flags
mentions only %optflags to be required for packages but I noticed that
%configure sets LDFLAGS to a value different than %optflags:
rpm --eval %configure
[...]
LDFLAGS=${LDFLAGS:--Wl,-z,relro };
Till Maas wrote:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines?rd=Packaging/Guidelines#Compiler_flags
mentions only %optflags to be required for packages but I noticed that
%configure sets LDFLAGS to a value different than %optflags:
rpm --eval %configure
[...]
12 matches
Mail list logo