From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2018 14:14:03 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/3] lm-sensors: remove redundant BUILD_STATIC_LIB build parameter In-Reply-To: References: <6592ba5b855eb8d5f79c6d883a45bdf02f1bfb49.1545905628.git.baruch@tkos.co.il> Message-ID: <20181227141403.077691b0@windsurf> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hello, On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 12:34:31 +0100, Romain Naour wrote: > Le 27/12/2018 ? 11:13, Baruch Siach a ?crit?: > > Commit 3e05efd76636 ("package/lm-sensors: disable static library for > > shared-only build") added BUILD_STATIC_LIB to LM_SENSORS_MAKE_OPTS with > > value that depends on BR2_SHARED_LIBS, but forgot to remove it from the > > common LM_SENSORS_MAKE_OPTS. Fix that. > > IIRC, this patch was part of a series fixing packages that build a static > library when BR2_SHARED_LIBS is set. I had a special hook checking if a package > install a *.a file to STAGING_DIR. > But this effort was stopped since there is some corner case where a .a file is > needed: > > http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/2015-January/116736.html Are you pointing to the right e-mail? This e-mail is not at all saying that there are some corner cases where a .a file is needed. All what I was saying in this e-mail is: is it really worth patching / adding more complexity to lots of packages just to make sure they don't build/install a static library when BR2_SHARED_LIBS=y. > But, we still have a case where a package A install a shared and a static > library and a package B that depend on package A can choose to link against the > shared or the static library. I don't follow you here :-/ Best regards, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com