[debbugs-tracker] bug#36339: closed (generated .pc files leaks build-time LDFLAGS)

[GNU bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Sun, 07 Jul 2019 15:09:29 +0200
with message-id <address@hidden>
and subject line Re: bug#36339: generated .pc files leaks build-time LDFLAGS
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #36339,
regarding generated .pc files leaks build-time LDFLAGS
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
address@hidden.)


-- 
36339: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=36339
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact address@hidden with problems
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> generated .pc files leaks build-time LDFLAGS
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Sun, 23 Jun 2019 11:19:52 +0200
>
>
>
>
> User-agent: 
>
> Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.7.1
>
>
>
>
> Hello,
>
> According to the pkgconfig generated files, Libs.private contains the 
> build-time LDFLAGS (-Wl,-O1 -Wl,--as-needed).
>
> These flags are private to the way I built guile, and should not affect 
> packages using guile later.
>
> I have observed this behavior in guile-2.0, 2.2.5 and 2.9.2.
>
> -----8<-----8<-----8<-----8<-----8<-----
> Name: GNU Guile
> Description: GNU's Ubiquitous Intelligent Language for Extension
> Version: 2.0.14
> Libs: -L${libdir} -lguile-2.0 -lgc
> Libs.private:  -lgmp -lltdl -L/usr/lib64/../lib64 -lffi \
>   -lunistring -Wl,-O1 -Wl,--as-needed  -lcrypt  -lm             \
>                 \
>
> Cflags: -I${pkgincludedir}/2.0 -pthread
> ----->8----->8----->8----->8----->8-----
>
>
> Gentoo Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/590904
> The (1) part seems resolved somehow.
>
> Thanks,
> Cyprien
>
>
>
> --- End Message ---
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> Re: bug#36339: generated .pc files leaks build-time LDFLAGS
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Sun, 07 Jul 2019 15:09:29 +0200
>
>
>
>
> User-agent: 
>
> Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.2 (gnu/linux)
>
>
>
>
> Hi Cyprien,
>
> Cyprien Nicolas <address@hidden> skribis:
>
> > On 24/06/2019 15:17, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> >>
> >> I believe the attached patch should fix it.  Could you confirm?
> >
> > Yes it does, tested on 2.2.6 and 2.9.2. All arch-dependent binaries have
> > been built with the right LDFLAGS, and the pkgconfig file looks clean.
>
> Awesome.  Pushed as a69b567d97f7c9193924c775e1dd86e43a35b8bd to the
> ‘stable-2.2’ branch.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Ludo’.
>
>
> --- End Message ---