From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Seiderer Date: Tue, 21 May 2019 18:54:47 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/1] package/meson: Fix linking of shared/static libs with static libs In-Reply-To: <20190520204517.52564b80@windsurf.home> References: <20190514184245.92222-1-aduskett@gmail.com> <20190518215637.2ea2ea51@windsurf> <20190520202615.37fbd048@gmx.net> <20190520204517.52564b80@windsurf.home> Message-ID: <20190521185447.2de12554@gmx.net> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hello Thomas, On Mon, 20 May 2019 20:45:17 +0200, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > Hello Peter, > > Thanks for your feedback! > > On Mon, 20 May 2019 20:26:15 +0200 > Peter Seiderer wrote: > > > I can confirm the patch fixes the gstreamer static build/static libs > > problem (see [1]).... > > > > But as it is a (not yet) upstream committed bugfix, maybe it is better to > > wait for a upstream committ and/or next meson version bump? > > That would of course be the best approach... > > > On the other side the gstreamer folks where bored with waiting for the > > meson fix to be accepted and committed an workaround for the problem > > already (see [2])... > > > > Conclusion: Take the patch in case there is already a buildroot > > in-tree package which needs the fix (or commit the patch with > > in series with a in-tree user), otherwise wait for meson > > upstream... > > ... however, if it starts holding off bumping too many packages, I > guess we'll have to take this patch. Having to add a !BR2_STATIC_LIBS > dependency to libglib2 would be really horrible, considering the number > of reverse dependencies that libglib2 has. As far as I know only gstreamer itself is affected (the only package linking a static library using an internal static helper library)? But the first other package affected by this bug justifies the patch applied ;-) > > At least, if the problem is acknowledged upstream, we know it will be > fixed at some point. Perhaps not with the exact patch we will have, but > at least it will be fixed, which means we won't have to carry this > patch forever. Yes... Regards, Peter > > Thomas