Re: Gstreamer and rpath

[Michael Krelin <hacker@klever.net>]

> Michael Krelin wrote:
>>> Michael Krelin wrote:
>>>> I don't know much about gstreamer, but being inventor of
>>>> OE_LT_RPATH_ALLOW I felt obliged to look into gst-plugins.inc and I'm
>>>> guessing it should be:
>>> Maybe it would be better to not break build environment and then work
>>> around consequent errors by hacks like OE_LT_RPATH_ALLOW,
>>> never-ever-do-rpath.patch etc.
>>>
>>> gcc has --sysroot which can do required linking without any hacks.
>>>
>> Generally, I tend to agree, but in practice I'm afraid that would amount
>> to rewriting the whole OE...
> 
> No.
> 
> 1. and 2. and 4. should be change of about 20 lines (change xxxx_CC from
> e. g. "arm-angstrom-linux-gnueabi-gcc" to e. g.
> "arm-angstrom-linux-gnueabi-gcc --sysroot=/OE/build/tmp/staging/arm-angstrom-linux-gnueabi").
> I only could not find correct lines.

staging doesn't resemble root filesystem, to begin with. So that would
involve rearranging staging as well. Which is again a good idea, but
would take longer that it sounds in pure theory.

Love,
H

> 
> If anybody tell me the correct location, I can do test bootstrap with
> the new options.
> 
> 5. is low priority, after 4. it will become NOP
> 
> 6. Is already done, it should be enough to change check pattern in the
> QA stuff.
> 
> 3. and 7. break packages (e. g. findutils) not depending on CC
> definition and has to be fixed manually anyway.
> 
> And if 8. will be done (in far future), most individual fixes in 7.
> could be removed.
>