From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Hemminger Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] iproute2: drop libresolv Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 08:51:15 -0800 Message-ID: <20121112085115.04ea916c@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net> References: <20121110122209.GA15100@amd64.fatal.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Andreas Henriksson Return-path: Received: from mail.vyatta.com ([76.74.103.46]:49555 "EHLO mail.vyatta.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753804Ab2KLQwR (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Nov 2012 11:52:17 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20121110122209.GA15100@amd64.fatal.se> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sat, 10 Nov 2012 13:22:10 +0100 Andreas Henriksson wrote: > Hello! > > While building the iproute package in Debian I get warnings from > package helpers like this: > > dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: package could avoid a useless dependency if debian/iproute/sbin/tc debian/iproute/usr/bin/lnstat debian/iproute/bin/ip debian/iproute/bin/ss debian/iproute/sbin/bridge debian/iproute/sbin/rtmon were not linked against libresolv.so.2 (they use none of the library's symbols) > > The -lresolv in ./Makefile seems to come from pre-historic times (before > iproute2 git history, possibly from libc5/pre-glibc days). > I couldn't find out if/why there was any reason for linking to libresolv. > Does anyone know if there are any valid reasons for keeping it still? > > If not, I'd be happy to see it go.... while at it I also removed includes > of which I also couldn't find any reason for, but this is > just an added bonus of the patch (and there are probably more unneeded > includes that could be dropped in the same sources). > > > Signed-off-by: Andreas Henriksson > Makes sense, applied.