From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 22:50:56 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 0/2] package/directfb,sdl: fix static link In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20170223225056.57bdac3f@free-electrons.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hello, On Thu, 23 Feb 2017 22:29:19 +0100, Yann E. MORIN wrote: > Yann E. MORIN (2): > package/directfb: hack .pc file for static link > package/sdl: fix .pc file Thanks for working on this. However, can we instead patch the directfb and sdl build system? For example, the SDL build system should not add -ldirect to Libs: if DirectFB was detected with pkg-config, it should add it to the Requires: line. For DirectFB, I think libstdc++ could be unconditionally added to directfb.pc.in. *But*: let's take a step back. Do we really care about using DirectFB in static-only scenarios ? If only DirectFB and SDL were active upstream projects, there would be some incentive to fix this problem properly. But really, there is no such incentive. So what about making DirectFB depend on !BR2_STATIC_LIBS instead, and be done with it ? Nowhere in Buildroot we "select BR2_PACKAGE_DIRECTFB", which means it's really a simple change to do, as we don't need to propagate this dependency to any reverse dependency. Best regards, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com