From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Oct 16 07:40:24 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5264116A41F; Sun, 16 Oct 2005 07:40:24 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from obrien@NUXI.com) Received: from dragon.NUXI.org (trang.nuxi.com [66.93.134.19]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D3DB43D48; Sun, 16 Oct 2005 07:40:23 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from obrien@NUXI.com) Received: from dragon.NUXI.org (obrien@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dragon.NUXI.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j9G7eMg9040355; Sun, 16 Oct 2005 00:40:22 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from obrien@dragon.NUXI.org) Received: (from obrien@localhost) by dragon.NUXI.org (8.13.4/8.13.1/Submit) id j9G7eMdc040354; Sun, 16 Oct 2005 00:40:22 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from obrien) Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 00:40:21 -0700 From: "David O'Brien" To: Alexander Leidinger Message-ID: <20051016074021.GA53525@dragon.NUXI.org> References: <200510052317.j95NHWBa083203@repoman.freebsd.org> <20051006161412.w5ykixx5s0sskc00@netchild.homeip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20051006161412.w5ykixx5s0sskc00@netchild.homeip.net> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 7.0-CURRENT Organization: The NUXI BSD Group X-Pgp-Rsa-Fingerprint: B7 4D 3E E9 11 39 5F A3 90 76 5D 69 58 D9 98 7A X-Pgp-Rsa-Keyid: 1024/34F9F9D5 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, portmgr@FreeBSD.org, Trevor Johnson , cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/print/acroread7 Makefile X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: obrien@FreeBSD.org List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 07:40:24 -0000 On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 04:14:12PM +0200, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > Technically it isn't needed to run brandelf, but to be on the safe side we > should use it. There are cases where you can shoot into your foot without a > branded binary. I didn't encountered such an edge case myself, but I > remember a case where an unbranded binary caused the system to reboot > (because it triggered the wrong syscall). Feel free to start a discussion > about the necessarity/deprecation of brandelf on -current if you think > brandelf is useless. brandelf is absolutely required if the binary is a static binary. Because the vendor may change between static and dynamic binary building, it is a good ideal to always brand Linux binaries. -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)