This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH] Don't build .os objects of static-only-routines for extralibs
On 03/12/2013 05:18 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> * extra-lib.mk (extra-objs): Add static-only-routines as .oS
> instead of .os.
> ---
> extra-lib.mk | 7 ++++++-
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/extra-lib.mk b/extra-lib.mk
> index a2293c5..247946f 100644
> --- a/extra-lib.mk
> +++ b/extra-lib.mk
> @@ -34,7 +34,12 @@ extra-objs += $(foreach o,$(filter-out .os .oS,$(object-suffixes-$(lib))),\
> $($(lib)-shared-only-routines),\
> $(all-$(lib)-routines))))
> ifneq (,$(filter .os,$(object-suffixes-$(lib))))
> -extra-objs += $(all-$(lib)-routines:%=%.os)
> +extra-objs += $(patsubst %,%.os,$(filter-out $($(lib)-static-only-routines),\
> + $(all-$(lib)-routines)))
> +endif
> +ifneq (,$(filter .oS,$(object-suffixes-$(lib))))
> +extra-objs += $(patsubst %,%.oS,$(filter $($(lib)-static-only-routines),\
> + $(all-$(lib)-routines)))
> endif
> alltypes-$(lib) := $(foreach o,$(object-suffixes-$(lib)),\
> $(objpfx)$(patsubst %,$(libtype$o),\
>
Does this actually cause a problem building a library
using extra-lib.mk?
I'm trying to read the code and determine under which
conditions this would break one of the existing libraries
we build uding extra-lib.mk, but given my build logs it
looks like
I understand that this is a correctness issue, but I was
just wondering if it has any actual impact on our builds
today.
Cheers,
Carlos.