[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: PATCH: Use libgcj_convenience.la ( Re: libjava bootstrap failure on
From: |
Alexandre Oliva |
Subject: |
Re: PATCH: Use libgcj_convenience.la ( Re: libjava bootstrap failure on sparc-sun-solaris2.8) |
Date: |
08 Jun 2002 14:06:12 -0300 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 |
[CC:ing automake mailing list]
On Jun 7, 2002, Hans-Peter Nilsson <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 5 Jun 2002, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> What -static doesn't mean to libtool is to reject any kind of dynamic
>> linking. -all-static does that [...]
> But -all-static isn't a valid gcc option. When in a tree such
> as the binutils+gcc+whatnot, it's nice to be able to pass
> "CC=gcc -static" in the toplevel at configure time, and know
> that everything is statically linked. (And no, that doesn't
> work with unpatched libtool.) Passing "CC=gcc -all-static"
> would work if every subdirectory used libtool everywhere, but
> just plain where they don't.
I agree the non-standard meaning of -static in libtool is unfortunate,
but IIRC I inherited it that way, and never had the courage to change
it :-)
A way I thought to alleviate this problem would be to get automake to
support say LT_LDFLAGS, such that to make sure you get only
statically-linked binaries, you could use `CC=gcc -static' and
`LT_LDFLAGS=-all-static'. Automakers, what do you think? Should I
file a PR with this suggestion?
--
Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer address@hidden, redhat.com}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp address@hidden, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist Professional serial bug killer
- Re: PATCH: Use libgcj_convenience.la ( Re: libjava bootstrap failure on sparc-sun-solaris2.8),
Alexandre Oliva <=