From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.pbcl.net ([88.198.119.4] helo=hetzner.pbcl.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QuLO8-0003rg-Lp for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 11:29:16 +0200 Received: from elite.brightsigndigital.co.uk ([81.142.160.137] helo=[172.30.1.145]) by hetzner.pbcl.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QuLJe-0001tp-Ej for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 11:24:38 +0200 From: Phil Blundell To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 10:24:37 +0100 In-Reply-To: <5e892786b427b2049ddf0e660d57877e24f89385.1313700595.git.sgw@linux.intel.com> References: <5e892786b427b2049ddf0e660d57877e24f89385.1313700595.git.sgw@linux.intel.com> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.0.2- Message-ID: <1313745878.6733.259.camel@phil-desktop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [CONSOLIDATED PULL 15/32] conf, recipes: Redefine LINKER_HASH_STYLE X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 09:29:16 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 2011-08-18 at 13:55 -0700, Saul Wold wrote: > From: Khem Raj > > LINKER_HASH_STYLE is not set to either sysv or gnu > depending upon architecture e.g. mips does not support > gnu hash style among the supported architectures so > we make sure its set to 'sysv' form mips > > Linker flags are munged to adhere to renamed variable > > Third option is to set it to 'both' we do > not do that by default but user can still set it It wasn't totally obvious to me why this patch is a good thing. Can you explain why this change is desirable? Also, I found the first paragraph of the description above quite hard to understand. Do you think you could try to reword it to be a bit clearer? p.