gEDA-dev: PCB plug-ins

[Bert Timmerman <bert.timmerman@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Dan, DJ and all,

I started collecting plug-ins some time ago and I was wondering if it
would be a good idea to:

a) include some (or all) of them in the pcb tarball, for instance in
src/plug-ins.

or 

b) distribute them as a (with pcb related) separate tarball. For
instance pcb-YYYYMMDD,tar.gz and pcb-plugins-YYYYMMDD.tar.gz.

I started some preliminary work on b) to be found at:

http://github.com/bert/pcb-plugins

Kind regards,

Bert Timmerman.



On Sat, 2008-05-24 at 18:23 -0400, Dan McMahill wrote:
> DJ Delorie wrote:
> >> /usr/bin/ld: footprintupdate.o: relocation R_X86_64_32 against `a
> >> local symbol' can not be used when making a shared object; recompile
> >> with -fPIC
> > 
> > Shared libraries should ALWAYS be built with -fpic or -fPIC.  The i386
> > gets away without it because the developers got tired of answering
> > questions like the above, and put in special handling for that error
> > case to make it work.
> 
> the option to produce pic code is compiler dependent. -fPIC works for 
> gcc.  For SunPRO its -KPIC -DPIC (or -kPIC -DPIC, can't recall if k is 
> upper or lower).
> 
> How many systems have different behavior for -fpic vs -fPIC?  I suspect 
> we'd always want -fPIC (for gcc that is).
> 
> -Dan
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> geda-user mailing list
> geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user



_______________________________________________
geda-dev mailing list
geda-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-dev