From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [85.37.17.112] (helo=smtp-out112.alice.it) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MpKrL-00005v-Hn for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Sun, 20 Sep 2009 13:45:43 +0200 Received: from FBCMMO01.fbc.local ([192.168.68.195]) by smtp-out112.alice.it with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Sun, 20 Sep 2009 13:45:03 +0200 Received: from FBCMCL01B09.fbc.local ([192.168.171.26]) by FBCMMO01.fbc.local with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Sun, 20 Sep 2009 13:45:03 +0200 Received: from [192.168.1.107] ([80.117.40.142]) by FBCMCL01B09.fbc.local with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Sun, 20 Sep 2009 13:45:03 +0200 From: GNUtoo To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org In-Reply-To: <1253430822.4490.1515.camel@lenovo.internal.reciva.com> References: <20090917054034.GB5465@denix.org> <1253188893.12689.556.camel@mill.internal.reciva.com> <1253396926.1456.14.camel@localhost> <1253430822.4490.1515.camel@lenovo.internal.reciva.com> Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2009 13:45:02 +0200 Message-Id: <1253447102.8671.2.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.24.4 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Sep 2009 11:45:03.0539 (UTC) FILETIME=[CAC18830:01CA39E7] X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 85.37.17.112 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: GNUtoo@no-log.org X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:20:07 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on linuxtogo.org); Unknown failure Subject: Re: [RFC] -dbg for static libraries? X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2009 11:45:43 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Sun, 2009-09-20 at 08:13 +0100, Phil Blundell wrote: > On Sat, 2009-09-19 at 23:48 +0200, GNUtoo wrote: > > Phil Blundell wrote: > > > Or, for SDK purposes, you could even consider ditching the .a > > > libraries altogether for packages that have a .so since virtually > > > nobody is going to be doing static linking in this day and age. > > > > I often do static linking for different reasons: > > *different libc on the target(like with android for instance) > > *debugging(like in the case where all shared libs segfaulted on mips > > +uclibc,I needed a static gdb,a static strace etc...) > > Neither of those are really the kind of use-cases that the SDK is > targeting. If you are doing initial bringup/debug on a particular > target system then you would probably want to use an in-tree build just > as you do today. > > The SDK exists to support casual software development on relatively > stable target platforms, by people who don't wish to build the entire > system from scratch for themselves, and in almost all cases you don't > want to encourage static linking there. > > p. ok thanks for the explanations...I think I have read too fast(lots of mails) (I was thinking that the static libraries were to be removed in the normal in-tree build) Denis.