From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2011 15:25:27 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] prefer static libraries question In-Reply-To: <201104121836.55644.vapier@gentoo.org> References: <9AC3F0E75060224C8BBC5BA2DDC8853A1F99AC7E@EXV1.corp.adtran.com> <201104120248.26575.vapier@gentoo.org> <9AC3F0E75060224C8BBC5BA2DDC8853A1FA8E4DC@EXV1.corp.adtran.com> <201104121836.55644.vapier@gentoo.org> Message-ID: <20110422152527.7ec95de5@surf> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net On Tue, 12 Apr 2011 18:36:54 -0400 Mike Frysinger wrote: > might be better to rename or add a new option. then the build logic > is clear: if user *prefers* static linking, we'll still build/install > shared libs, but we'll generate static programs everywhere. if the > user *only* wants static builds, then we can skip the shared lib > stuff entirely. Does the "prefers" use case really makes sense ? I have always found our BR2_PREFER_STATIC_LIB a bit odd, and I think it should be BR2_USE_STATIC_LIB instead, and compile everything statically. What do you think ? Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux development, consulting, training and support. http://free-electrons.com