[Pixman] [PATCH 1/4] test: static link pixman in matrix-test
siarhei.siamashka at gmail.com
Tue Apr 26 18:32:50 UTC 2016
On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 19:20:58 +0100
Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov at gmail.com> wrote:
> The test uses pixman internal symbols, which we currently export. To
> resolve that static link the pixman library. This is an internal only
> test ran at `make check' thus we are fine with the bloated binary and
> Signed-off-by: Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov at gmail.com>
> Afaics the Windows build already uses a static library thus things
> should be fine there. I have NOT tested it though.
> If people are concerned with this approach, we can build the core files
> once and explicitly setup a pixman-static.la for the tests to use.
> test/Makefile.am | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> diff --git a/test/Makefile.am b/test/Makefile.am
> index 88dc36d..f70440e 100644
> --- a/test/Makefile.am
> +++ b/test/Makefile.am
> @@ -5,6 +5,8 @@ AM_LDFLAGS = $(OPENMP_CFLAGS) $(TESTPROGS_EXTRA_LDFLAGS) $(PTHREAD_LDFLAGS)
> LDADD = libutils.la $(top_builddir)/pixman/libpixman-1.la -lm $(PNG_LIBS) $(PTHREAD_LIBS)
> AM_CPPFLAGS = -I$(top_srcdir)/pixman -I$(top_builddir)/pixman $(PNG_CFLAGS)
> +matrix_test_LDFLAGS = -static
> libutils_la_SOURCES = $(libutils_sources) $(libutils_headers)
> noinst_LTLIBRARIES = libutils.la
Well, I have only one question. Where is the profit and what are we
supposed to gain by applying patches from this series?
Right now if you are interested in compiling static test programs,
then you can use the --enable-static-testprogs configure option.
It is useful for running the pixman test suite under QEMU with the
help of binfmt_misc.
And we currently also can run the test suite against pixman shared
libraries, which are built and shipped as binary packages by various
Linux distributions. In the case if some distribution maintainers are
up to no good , this still allows us to confirm whether they are
shipping broken pixman binaries even without any need to figure out
how to use their build infrastructure.
If I understand it correctly, you are basically trying to go an
extra mile to remove the existing diagnostic interface from the
pixman shared library. Would we lose anything if we just keep
things working as they are?
More information about the Pixman