plevine457 at gmail.com
Sat Jan 13 14:21:52 EST 2018
On Saturday, January 13, 2018 5:33:12 AM CET John Ralls wrote:
> That doesn’t answer or even address the questions.
> You seem to have missed that many projects, GnuCash included, set numerous
> CPPFlags and LDFLAGS in their configuration scripts... and that’s a
> completely separate issue from whatever restrictions Gentoo attempts to
> impose on its users.
Yes. The reason given by Googletest for suggesting against
pre-compiled libraries is that dependent projects might be built with
different flags causing different definitions for the same symbol.
Consistent, safe optimization and arch flags can't do that John. And
that's our bread and butter.
> No, I don’t believe that using static libraries will mask ODR violations and
> bringing up a Googletest bug is utterly irrelevant.
You don't have to believe it John. I'ts a well documented and
reproducible fact. The doublefree error shows up because the string
vector's destructor's symbol exists more than once because of a build
time linking error. It doesn't show up when built as a static
> Geert has already told you that we’ll accept reasonable patches, though you
> should recognize that if someone at Gentoo isn’t keyed in to maintaining
> them they’ll bitrot.
I would expect nothing less.
> There’s another problem here: You say that you’ve already applied Googletest
> PR 1339 in Gentoo. Googletest hasn’t accepted that PR, so you’ve forked
> Googletest. Is that clearly documented to your users? Do you have written
> permission from Google to continue to call your fork Googletest? See the
> third bullet in https://github.com/google/googletest/blob/master/LICENSE
> How many other project’s licenses does Gentoo violate?
I'm sure on some level you realize how absurd that statement is.
Patched code doesn't fit the definition of "derived" by any stretch of
More information about the gnucash-devel