[BusyBox] makefile differences from current CVS and 0.50

[Manuel Novoa III]

On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Mark Whitley wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 10:32:27AM -0700, Dr. Craig Hollabaugh wrote:
> > No I didn't do an install because I didn't have to with the 0.50 release (it
> > just worked).
> 
> Weird. Even pre-0.50 I always had to do a 'make install' on uClibc to get
> busybox to link against it. *shrug*

Actually, the "make install" for uClibc is unecessary if you are staticly
linking against uClibc.  That's because the gcc wrapper currently always looks
for the static library in the uClibc build directory.

Manuel