From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Baruch Siach Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2015 20:16:52 +0300 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH] make: requires dynamic libraries In-Reply-To: <20150920190408.48d568c0@free-electrons.com> References: <1442450292-13794-1-git-send-email-ryanbarnett3@gmail.com> <20150917232742.6b253d01@free-electrons.com> <20150920185821.53cb363b@free-electrons.com> <20150920190408.48d568c0@free-electrons.com> Message-ID: <20150920171652.GI2782@tarshish> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hi Thomas, On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 07:04:08PM +0200, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 18:58:21 +0200, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > > > On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 09:40:25 -0500, Ryan Barnett wrote: > > > > > I am going to go disabling guile support in a static only > > > configuration. I ran into an issue with setting GC_NO_DLOPEN define in > > > that there then becomes multiple definitions of locale_charset between > > > libintl and libguile and I wasn't sure how to properly fix it. Looking > > > at what guile is used for in make, it doesn't appear extremely useful > > > especially in a static only configuration. > > > > I think we should disable guile support completely, not only for static > > only builds. I don't really see the usefulness of guile support in > > make in the context of Buildroot. > > I didn't see that there is some explicit handling of guile in our > current make package. It was added by Baruch in commit > 38ee8a8e1651f1de2b2698e4c6bce2e488001cdb. > > Baruch, were you specifically interested in guile support in make? No. It was just the usual optional dependency for the sake of reproducibility as part of a related build failure investigation. I'm fine with removing guile support in make. baruch -- http://baruch.siach.name/blog/ ~. .~ Tk Open Systems =}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{= - baruch at tkos.co.il - tel: +972.2.679.5364, http://www.tkos.co.il -