Subject: Re: modload vs. ld/libbfd
To: Ignatios Souvatzis <is@beverly.kleinbus.org>
From: Jim Wise <jwise@draga.com>
List: tech-install
Date: 04/04/2005 15:03:30
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Mon, 4 Apr 2005, Ignatios Souvatzis wrote:

>Hi,
>
>On Sat, Apr 02, 2005 at 11:36:53AM -0500, Jim Wise wrote:
>
>> >--- base/gcc.shl.orig	2004-08-13 01:02:24.000000000 +0000
>> >+++ base/gcc.shl	2005-03-30 14:55:29.000000000 +0000
>> >@@ -1,4 +1,6 @@
>> > # $NetBSD: gcc.shl,v 1.4 2004/08/13 01:02:24 lukem Exp $
>> >+./usr/lib/libbfd.so.7                              comp-c-shlib            bfd
>> >+./usr/lib/libbfd.so.7.0                            comp-c-shlib            bfd
>>                                                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> Probably obvious, but these should become base-sys-shlib if you take 
>> this path.
>
>What about the "bfd" part? I notice none of the other files in gcc.shl 
>uses this...

That's apparently used by the fixes to make set lists do the right thing 
in the face of various MKFOO=no make options.  I like it, but I didn't 
notice it till just now.  :-)

- -- 
				Jim Wise
				jwise@draga.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (NetBSD)

iD8DBQFCUY+FpRpI6SYACmIRAq2YAJ4zr8XZKaLZ3E4siCtPxGa20QOCiQCfTWZb
yuQfBdHGCDg26lR/w4mH4Tw=
=shSH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----