Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thursday 22 September 2005 05:23 am, Ervin Németh wrote:
>
you can put 'EXTRA_ECONF=--disable-static' into your /etc/make.conf ...
-mike
Is this safe to use on desktop machine or it is only developers
suggestion for testing? I want to know if it could broke my syste
On Thursday 22 September 2005 05:23 am, Ervin Németh wrote:
> * It would break bash, because the ebuild expects a static libcurses.
well, yes and no ... if static ncurses is unavailable, the bash ebuild will
use the bundled gnutermcap (which sucks hard compared to ncurses)
> For automake packa
On Thursday 22 September 2005 11:23, Ervin Németh wrote:
> But how?
>
> If I do a "du -hc /usr/lib/lib*.a | tail -n1", it shows 63M. And I
> really don't need them.
>
> Why INSTALL_MASK="*.a" is bad?
>
> * It would break bash, because the ebuild expects a static libcurses.
>
> * It would not sa
But how?
If I do a "du -hc /usr/lib/lib*.a | tail -n1", it shows 63M. And I
really don't need them.
Why INSTALL_MASK="*.a" is bad?
* It would break bash, because the ebuild expects a static libcurses.
* It would not save compile time. I would really appreciate if gtk+
compiled twice as fast
