Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 15:02:41 -0700 From: "David O'Brien" <dev-null@NUXI.com> To: Mikhail Teterin <mi+mx@aldan.algebra.com> Cc: current@FreeBSD.org, "David O'Brien" <dev-null@NUXI.com>, ru@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: recent bsd.lib.mk changes Message-ID: <20020621150241.A34548@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <200206211746.17877.mi%2Bmx@aldan.algebra.com>; from mi%2Bmx@aldan.algebra.com on Fri, Jun 21, 2002 at 05:46:17PM -0400 References: <200206211429.33406.mi%2Bmx@aldan.algebra.com> <20020621132839.A68827@dragon.nuxi.com> <200206211746.17877.mi%2Bmx@aldan.algebra.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Jun 21, 2002 at 05:46:17PM -0400, Mikhail Teterin wrote: > = I can think of very few reasons to build a .so, but not a .a. Some > = people do like to build static binaries. > > And some people are the opposite. However, for loadable (as in dlopen(3)) > plugins, suchs Tcl modules the static libraries are useless at best. I said "few", not "none". > Why can't we have some way to explicitly list what is and what is not > needed? Feel free to send a patch adding "ONLYSHAREDLIBS". "INTERNALLIB" in no logical way I can think of would lead someone to think that only shared libs should be built and they should be installed. > By this logic, we don't need to install the bsd.*.mk files at all... If you want "cd /usr/src/bin/foo && make all install" to work, you need to have the installed in /usr/share/mk. > Note, that they are not even called freebsd.*.mk -- to me, the names > implies they are (more or less) consistens among all of the BSDs :-) They started life when there was but _1_ BSD and that one was from CSRG @ UCB. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020621150241.A34548>