It would also help if this wasn't the case of how it should be that people
aren't sending mail on previous commits telling me I should be using
_OPSYS_RPATH_NAME...

I personally don't care either way, but it's not documented and when I get
mail saying "hey you shoulda done it this way" I tend to buy into that since
it's in use already in 5 other packages.

James

>Masao Uebayashi <uebayasi@pultek.co.jp> wrote:
>> > > Log Message:
>> > > Needs -Wl,-R (or the equiv) when linking libgc. Pass _OPSYS_RPATH_NAME in and
>> > > use that accordingly
>> > So, what do we do with this?  I thought we figure out a way to let
>> > buildlink2 take care of this?  If not, we should change the name to
>> 
>> AFAIK, yes, we don't need to consider '(or the equiv)' part since
>> Buildlink2 wrappers always replace possible equivalents to the
>> equivalent for the host.
>
>So if we need "-Wl,-rpath,/path", we patch the file to use "-Wl,-R/path"
>and then let buildlink2 convert it?  That is confusing, or at least
>counterintuitive.
>
>I still think that we should make the _OPSYS_RPATH_NAME a normal,
>public variable that is passed to MAKE_ENV by default.
>
>-Jan
>
>-- 
>I always said there was something fundamentally wrong with the universe.
>
>
>