From owner-freebsd-current  Sat Jun  3 17:07:48 1995
Return-Path: current-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id RAA18129
          for current-outgoing; Sat, 3 Jun 1995 17:07:48 -0700
Received: from godzilla.zeta.org.au (godzilla.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.34])
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id RAA18115
          for <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org>; Sat, 3 Jun 1995 17:07:44 -0700
Received: (from bde@localhost) by godzilla.zeta.org.au (8.6.9/8.6.9) id KAA32034; Sun, 4 Jun 1995 10:04:47 +1000
Date: Sun, 4 Jun 1995 10:04:47 +1000
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
Message-Id: <199506040004.KAA32034@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
To: rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com, roberto@keltia.freenix.fr
Subject: Re: Some Makefiles incorrectly set LDADD
Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Sender: current-owner@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk

>LDADD should not be set with a += in a Makefile unless that Makefile
>has mutliple LDADD lines with in it.

>> Why is there no "+=" ? Is this intentional ?
>gndrsh# cd /usr/src
>gndrsh# vi `kfind -l LDADD+=`

>Look at a bunch of them a notice that we seem to be very inconsistent
>here, but the ones I look at may have LDADD's in ../Makefile.inc that
>I did not check for.

In /usr/src/*bin/*/Makefile, there are 75 LDADD's, 3 correct LDADD+='s
(after an LDADD= in the same file) and 12 bogus LDADD+='s, almost all
of which are not in 4.4lite.

LDADD+= is bogus because any definition of LDADD in a central header is
bogus.  Defining LDADD in a central header would be bogus because the
everything would be linked to the libraries in it and there would be no
way to override these libraries (+= usually adds to the wrong end of the
list for libraries).

Bruce