Re: CVS commit: src/usr.bin/awk

[Jason Thorpe <thorpej%shagadelic.org@localhost>]

On Oct 21, 2008, at 2:26 AM, Alan Barrett wrote:

> On Mon, 20 Oct 2008, Jason Thorpe wrote:
> > I would go so far as to say -- unless we're linking statically,  
> > there is
> > zero reason to DPADD a library at all, even for native builds.
>
> We have things like
>
>         LDADD+= -lfoo
>         DPADD+= ${LIBFOO}
>
> all over the source tree.  Are you suggesting that they should all be
> changed?

I'm suggesting they should all be removed.  A dynamically-linked  
program does not need this dependency because the updated version of  
the library will be pulled in at run-time anyway.  If the API changes,  
the auto-generated header file dependency will take care of it.

> Perhaps DPADD could be derived automatically from LDADD by some (new)
> magic in bsd.lib.mk which would do the right thing according to  
> whether
> the library is statically or dynamically linked.
>
> --apb (Alan Barrett)

-- thorpej