enhance directfb configurability
PATCH 1/1 enhance directfb configurability
Hi,
Here is a patch to widen options to configure directfb.
Micha
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: directfb.diff
Url: http://busybox.net/lists/buildroot/attachments/20081004/e17b290c/attachment.txt
PATCH 1/1 enhance directfb configurability
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Thiago A. Corr?a <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 12:00 PM
Subject: Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH] enhance directfb configurability
To: Micha Nelissen <[email protected]>
[...]
Review
Quoted 2 lines
(quoted diff) +2
-0+ --with-inputdrivers=$(DIRECTFB_INPUT) \ + --enable-static \
I'm not sure if forcing static lib on everyone is the right thing. If there is only one application on the system that depends on DirectFB, it might save some bytes, but if there are more than 1, shared lib would be prefered.
The rest seams to be quite good improvements.
Kind Regards,
Thiago A. Correa
PS: Sorry, forgot to include the list address.
PATCH 1/1 enhance directfb configurability
Quoted 4 lines · Thiago A. Corr?a
I'm not sure if forcing static lib on everyone is the right thing. If there is only one application on the system that depends on DirectFB, it might save some bytes, but if there are more than 1, shared lib would be prefered.
Wouldn't shared lib linking be the default? The static variant would need to be referenced explicitly by someone who wants to use it; but at least it's available. It also would only exist in the staging_dir, not the target dir.
Thanks,
Micha
PATCH 1/1 enhance directfb configurability
Quoted 11 lines · Micha Nelissen
Quoted 5 lines · Thiago A. Corr?a
I'm not sure if forcing static lib on everyone is the right thing. If there is only one application on the system that depends on DirectFB, it might save some bytes, but if there are more than 1, shared lib would be prefered.
Wouldn't shared lib linking be the default? The static variant would need to be referenced explicitly by someone who wants to use it; but at least it's available. It also would only exist in the
staging_dir, not the target dir.
Hmmm I'm not sure about the linking order. But then you are saying that even with --enable-static DirectFB will build the shared lib too? Others like Qt (embedded and desktop) only builds the static if you specify you want the static. I apply here and give it a try then. :)
Regards,
Thiago A. Correa
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): [email protected]
PATCH 1/1 enhance directfb configurability
Quoted 10 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Wouldn't shared lib linking be the default? The static variant would need to be referenced explicitly by someone who wants to use it; but at least it's available. It also would only exist in the
staging_dir, not the target dir.Hmmm I'm not sure about the linking order. But then you are saying that even with --enable-static DirectFB will build the shared lib too? Others like Qt (embedded and desktop) only builds the static if you specify you want the static. I apply here and give it a try then. :)
Ok, it built both static and shared. Seams ok, so I commited (r23621) with some small fixes.
Thanks!
Kind Regards,
Thiago A. Correa