Re: FreeBSD 4.6 - binutils 2.14 installs useless libbfd

["H. J. Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>]

On Fri, Sep 12, 2003 at 06:42:02PM +0100, John Levon wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2003 at 10:38:35AM -0700, H. J. Lu wrote:
> 
> > > We need to either install libbfd, or link statically.  I think
> > > distributions prefer to use dynamic linking to save space.
> > 
> > It is what we are doing today, at least on Linux. There are no
> > libbfd.so nor libopcodes.so if binutils.spec is used:
> > 
> > rm -f ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}%{_prefix}/lib/lib{bfd,opcodes}.{la,so}
> 
> Besides, that doesn't explain why bfd.h gets installed which definitely
> isn't needed if you want to force people to not use libbfd :)

I never said there were no libbfd.a or libopcodes.a, which are still
available on Linux. It is just that you can't link them dynamically,
unless you create the symlinks by hand.

> 
> Anyway I think we're in rough agreement, it's unfortunate for the few
> projects that need this functionality such as mine but as a general

There are no problems on Linux if the recent binutils and binutils.spec
are used.


H.J.