Closed fat-lobyte closed 12 years ago
Ok, I just read http://wiki.debian.org/RpathIssue, and it might not be a good Idea after all. Please tell me what you think.
Hello, I am reading through that article now. In the meantime, I have committed a fix to get_abi being called every single time even on "clean", which was part of an earlier edition of your main comment.
OK, that issue doesn't apply to xpcom_abi, because the binary in question is being run in a very specific way and is never distributed to others.
However, if you add it to XUL_LDFLAGS this also affects compilation of TARGET. Here, that issue does apply, and I don't want to risk ignoring its advice especially since there is no need for that extra flag - it works perfectly fine without it since it's loaded by firefox itself.
I suppose you could add it to the xpcom_abi target directly, which would allow us to call ./xpcom_abi directly and get rid of the "get_abi" target.
re-comment in case github doesn't send out notification emails on comment-update:
I suppose you could add it to the xpcom_abi target directly, which would allow us to call ./xpcom_abi directly and get rid of the "get_abi" target.
I suppose you could add it to the xpcom_abi target directly, which would allow us to call ./xpcom_abi directly and get rid of the "get_abi" target.
That seems reasonable. Is it ok if I rebase the pull request to a version of the commit that does that?
yes rebase here is alright :)
yes rebase here is alright :)
Ok, thanks. Please review and if it makes sense, you can merge.
merged, thanks!
Hi, please pull my commit about rpath-linking. This simplifies the invocation of the xpcom_abi and fixes cases, where multiple library directories are needed (ubuntu once again).
Makefile: