Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 21 Feb 2002 11:40:05 -0800 (PST)
From:      Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>
To:        freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: ports/34908: libpng port makes bad dynamic library on -CURRENT
Message-ID:  <200202211940.g1LJe5u14946@freefall.freebsd.org>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR ports/34908; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>
To: "Michael D. Harnois" <mharnois@cpinternet.com>
Cc: obrien@FreeBSD.ORG, Stijn Hoop <stijn@win.tue.nl>,
	"Alexander N. Kabaev" <ak03@gte.com>,
	Bjoern Fischer <bfischer@Techfak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>,
	current@FreeBSD.ORG,
	"freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD. Org" <freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org>,
	vova@sw.ru
Subject: Re: ports/34908: libpng port makes bad dynamic library on -CURRENT
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 11:29:46 -0800

 "Michael D. Harnois" wrote:
 > On Thu, 2002-02-21 at 04:03, David O'Brien wrote:
 > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 12:05:31AM +0100, Stijn Hoop wrote:
 > > >
 > > > Maybe this can now be committed?
 > >
 > > NOT until I have sufficient feedback from the FSF Binutils developers.
 > 
 > OK, I'm confused. binutils has been broken for three weeks. We have a
 > patch that we know fixes, at the very least, one of the known problems.
 > However, it can't be committed without feedback from the developers.
 > 
 > So having binutils broken indefinitely is better than applying a patch
 > that *might* have to be backed out or altered later?
 
 I believe the intent is to ensure that the patches make it
 back into the FSF distributed code, so that in the future,
 there is less maintenance required for FreeBSD platforms.
 
 This offloading of maintenance is a good idea, considering
 the stated positions of those with the currently thankless
 job of beating FSF code into submission to make it run on
 FreeBSD platforms.
 
 Actually, there was a discussion at BSDCon as to whether or
 not to drop the a.out support in order to decrease the patch
 size necessary to make the FSF distributed code do what FreeBSD
 needed it to do (personally, I would prefer that the a.out
 code generation be integrated back into the FSF code base but
 this is unlikely for FSF political reasons with regard to the
 intent to get rid of the a.out standard entirely).
 
 Such changes to the FreeBSD toolchain are necessary, unless
 there is sufficient support for what the FSF views as being
 gratuitous differences (e.g. not replacing BSD make with GNU
 make like FreeBSD is "supposed to do", etc.).
 
 While I would incredibly dislike losing a.out, since most of
 the promised advantages of ELF have not materialized (some,
 such as linking a library against a library have... but only
 for shared libraries), I have to side with David O'Brien,
 since he is at least actively involved in maintaining the
 code in question.
 
 -- Terry

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200202211940.g1LJe5u14946>