Subject: Re: The infamous hidden dependencies problem
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Greg A. Woods <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 06/07/2001 20:39:13
[ On Thursday, June 7, 2001 at 20:02:32 (-0400), Johnny C. Lam wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: The infamous hidden dependencies problem
> This is a relatively cool idea, though I see some minor problems with
> it. Firstly, you'd need to list every single library that is used by
> a package, which seems to be slightly onerous.
Well, every non-standard library (eg. not '-lc') :-)
But why's that onerous? That's part of software configuration to
specify all the components necessary. Pkgsrc mandates it anyway! (with
Hmmm.... maybe there's a way to tie DEPENDS in with the -I/-L stuff....
> Secondly, you'd still
> have to patch a lot of configure scripts since not all authors use the
> AC_CHECK_LIB macro;
I think that's the biggest problem, though it may "go away" in time if
users of Autoconf become happy and accustomed with its way of doing
> several packages create their own macros to check
> for librares. Thirdly, this only solves the problem for GNU
> autoconf-based packages. I think that we need something more general
> to isolate the build environment for all the packages, which is why
> I'm pushing this buildlink.mk idea.
The two may be necessary together in some cases....
consider what'll happen if PREFIX=/usr/local -- I'd bet some packages
will look there anyway, even if LDFLAGS doesn't include any "-L".
and even worse if $PREFIX/lib contains non-pkgsrc stuff....
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 218-0098 VE3TCP <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Planix, Inc. <email@example.com>; Secrets of the Weird <firstname.lastname@example.org>