From owner-freebsd-ports Wed Jan 13 18:35:25 1999 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA01651 for freebsd-ports-outgoing; Wed, 13 Jan 1999 18:35:25 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from cimlogic.com.au (cimlog.lnk.telstra.net [139.130.51.31]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id SAA01641 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 1999 18:35:22 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jb@cimlogic.com.au) Received: (from jb@localhost) by cimlogic.com.au (8.9.1/8.9.1) id MAA12900; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 12:56:03 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from jb) From: John Birrell Message-Id: <199901140156.MAA12900@cimlogic.com.au> Subject: Re: depending on libbfd In-Reply-To: <13981.17873.789684.661748@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> from Andrew Gallatin at "Jan 13, 1999 8:31:20 pm" To: gallatin@cs.duke.edu (Andrew Gallatin) Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 12:56:03 +1100 (EST) Cc: ports@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL43 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Andrew Gallatin wrote: > What's the proper FreeBSD way to handle something like this? > Do I just download a binutils distribution & build it from within the > port? > > Given that binutils is already in the source tree, it seems a little > odd that the bfd libraries & headers are never installed.. We probably should build shared versions and install them. Many of the binutils programs could be linked shared too. -- John Birrell - jb@cimlogic.com.au; jb@freebsd.org http://www.cimlogic.com.au/ CIMlogic Pty Ltd, GPO Box 117A, Melbourne Vic 3001, Australia +61 418 353 137 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message