NO_AUTOLIBS is not required as it was not used or defined in the config files. Signed-off-by: Keith Wiles <keith.wiles@intel.com> --- mk/rte.app.mk | 5 ----- 1 file changed, 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/mk/rte.app.mk b/mk/rte.app.mk index b8030d2..b63e346 100644 --- a/mk/rte.app.mk +++ b/mk/rte.app.mk @@ -54,11 +54,8 @@ endif _LDLIBS-y += -L$(RTE_SDK_BIN)/lib # -# Include libraries depending on config if NO_AUTOLIBS is not set # Order is important: from higher level to lower level # -ifeq ($(NO_AUTOLIBS),) - _LDLIBS-y += --whole-archive _LDLIBS-$(CONFIG_RTE_BUILD_COMBINE_LIBS) += -l$(RTE_LIBNAME) @@ -143,8 +140,6 @@ _LDLIBS-y += $(EXECENV_LDLIBS) _LDLIBS-y += --end-group _LDLIBS-y += --no-whole-archive -endif # ifeq ($(NO_AUTOLIBS),) - LDLIBS += $(_LDLIBS-y) $(EXTRA_LDLIBS) .PHONY: all -- 2.3.0
2015-05-01 09:29, Keith Wiles:
> NO_AUTOLIBS is not required as it was not used or defined in the config files.
>
> Signed-off-by: Keith Wiles <keith.wiles@intel.com>
> ---
> mk/rte.app.mk | 5 -----
> 1 file changed, 5 deletions(-)
Thanks Keith for trying to clean it, but removing half of an obsolete feature
is not a real clean-up ;)
When running "git grep NO_AUTOLIBS", it will return results in
doc/guides/prog_guide
I fixed the doc and manually applied your patch based on your _LDLIBS-y patch.
Maybe I'm too kind, I know people who whould refuse this patch :)
Sorry for being long here, but I want to show the work done when applying
patches and I want to ask: is it a good thing to manually fix patches in order
to speed-up the process or should it be more strict?
On 5/12/15, 8:07 AM, "Thomas Monjalon" <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> wrote: >2015-05-01 09:29, Keith Wiles: >> NO_AUTOLIBS is not required as it was not used or defined in the config >>files. >> >> Signed-off-by: Keith Wiles <keith.wiles@intel.com> >> --- >> mk/rte.app.mk | 5 ----- >> 1 file changed, 5 deletions(-) > >Thanks Keith for trying to clean it, but removing half of an obsolete >feature >is not a real clean-up ;) >When running "git grep NO_AUTOLIBS", it will return results in >doc/guides/prog_guide Sorry, did not find that one in the docs. I thought I had searched for other locations. > >I fixed the doc and manually applied your patch based on your _LDLIBS-y >patch. >Maybe I'm too kind, I know people who whould refuse this patch :) > >Sorry for being long here, but I want to show the work done when applying >patches and I want to ask: is it a good thing to manually fix patches in >order >to speed-up the process or should it be more strict?