From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 28 00:57:43 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 693E316A419; Tue, 28 Aug 2007 00:57:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from obrien@NUXI.com) Received: from dragon.nuxi.org (trang.nuxi.org [74.95.12.85]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F09613C465; Tue, 28 Aug 2007 00:57:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from obrien@NUXI.com) Received: from dragon.nuxi.org (obrien@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dragon.nuxi.org (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7S0v0xP053804; Mon, 27 Aug 2007 17:57:00 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from obrien@dragon.nuxi.org) Received: (from obrien@localhost) by dragon.nuxi.org (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id l7S0uspm053795; Mon, 27 Aug 2007 17:56:54 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from obrien) Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 17:56:54 -0700 From: "David O'Brien" To: "M. Warner Losh" Message-ID: <20070828005654.GA50401@dragon.NUXI.org> References: <20070824.172212.74696955.imp@bsdimp.com> <20070824.213615.146406398.imp@bsdimp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070824.213615.146406398.imp@bsdimp.com> 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/1.5.11 Cc: src-committers@freebsd.org, alfred@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org, deischen@freebsd.org, cvs-src@freebsd.org, yar@comp.chem.msu.su Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libc/gen fts-compat.c fts-compat.h 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: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 00:57:43 -0000 On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 09:36:15PM -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote: > In message: > Daniel Eischen writes: > : I guess the build system should be more tolerant of this, but > : there are bound to be problems regardless. I don't see why > : the install tools can't also either have their own set of > : libraries (utilizing LD_LIBRARY_PATH) or be built static. > > There's much resistance to building everything that the build system > might be used being build static. It adds too much time and > complexity to the build system, the opponents say. I've never heard an argument against building these bits static. What's the issue? -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)