Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 15:36:37 -0500 From: jhell <jhell@DataIX.net> To: Rob Farmer <rfarmer@predatorlabs.net> Cc: bf1783@gmail.com, gerald@freebsd.org, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: bsd.gcc.mk PREFIX or LOCALBASE? Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1002141533560.30651@pragry.qngnvk.ybpny> In-Reply-To: <b025ceb71002131847w6a925c1i2527493cea20c7d5@mail.gmail.com> References: <d873d5be1002130008k2ea4a8d8tf7078a22f97bb9d9@mail.gmail.com> <b025ceb71002131847w6a925c1i2527493cea20c7d5@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 21:47, rfarmer@ wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 12:08 AM, b. f. <bf1783@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>> In bsd.gcc.mk there is:
>>>
>>> . if ${_USE_GCC} != 3.4
>>> CFLAGS+= -Wl,-rpath=${PREFIX}/lib/${_GCC_BUILD_DEPENDS}
>>> LDFLAGS+= -Wl,-rpath=${PREFIX}/lib/${_GCC_BUILD_DEPENDS}
>>> . endif
>>>
>>> However, I think this should be ${LOCALBASE} instead of ${PREFIX}.
>>
>> I agree with you, and I meant to mention this to gerald@ earlier, but
>> I forgot. The Ports system is not now well-equipped to deal with
>> LOCALBASE != PREFIX for a lot of software, and most people don't do
>> this, so the impact is limited, but it does break some test builds and
>> utilities, as you have seen.
>
> Yeah, I realize this is kind of an unusual situation and I understand
> that with the ports freeze coming up that now is not a good time to be
> making these kind of changes, but just thought I would mention it
> since I came across it.
>
Could this possibly be the cause of the samba3* and cups ports getting
profiling enabled on them ? possibly others ?
If so I would think this should be important enough to fix before.
Inquisitive question.
--
jhell
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1002141533560.30651>