Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2023 16:06:33 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: chromium@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 273625] www/chromium: use base iconv Message-ID: <bug-273625-28929-hBrIBsypHC@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-273625-28929@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-273625-28929@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D273625 --- Comment #2 from gnikl@justmail.de --- @comment #1 > Yes you can build it with iconv support from libc. Thank you for the confirmation. I just realized that my digging about the i= conv addition was incorrect. Linking with iconv was added with commit a23dfd2 to base/BUILD.gn, commit bfedd5f moved the library reference to third_party/maldoca/BUILD.gn. > however the build will still link to libiconv because other dependencies = will pull it in so my opinion is that it is best not to mix the two and jus= t keep using libiconv. That is a reasonable stance. Still, I am not sure that chromium must link w= ith iconv only because a dependency uses it. I checked the direct dependencies = and the "culprit" is devel/glib20. Since libiconv is available because of glib20 the chromium build process simply picks it up. I believe avoiding the libic= onv dependency with the help of LIBICONV_PLUG would be reasonable. However, the decision how iconv should be handled, is your call. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-273625-28929-hBrIBsypHC>