[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: *_LDFLAGS vs. *_LDADD vs. *_LIBADD
From: |
Bruno Haible |
Subject: |
Re: *_LDFLAGS vs. *_LDADD vs. *_LIBADD |
Date: |
Mon, 11 Sep 2006 15:10:11 +0200 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.9.1 |
Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > And for executables, an *_LDADD variable exists, but the automake doc says
> > the opposite of what you say:
> >
> > `PROG_LDADD' is inappropriate for passing program-specific linker
> > flags (except for `-l', `-L', `-dlopen' and `-dlpreopen'). So, use the
> > `PROG_LDFLAGS' variable for this purpose.
>
> In what way is this opposite to my statement? -l is listed as exception
> in parentheses.
The options that I need to put there (from $(LTLIBICONV) or $(LIBICONV) etc.)
can contain -L, -l, and -rpath / -Wl,-rpath options. The latter should not
be added to PROG_LDADD, says the automake doc. So we must add them to
PROG_LDFLAGS.
It's not only the lib-link.m4 macros which produce -L, -l, -rpath options
together. pkgconfig descriptions (its 'Libs:' field) and xyz-config scripts
do the same (at least for -L and -l). Therefore it is unrealistic to ask
people to put the -L options into one variable and the -l options into
another variable.
Bruno
- gnulib-tool: support for LDFLAGS, Bruno Haible, 2006/09/06
- Re: gnulib-tool: support for LDFLAGS, Paul Eggert, 2006/09/08
- Re: gnulib-tool: support for LDFLAGS, Ralf Wildenhues, 2006/09/08
- Re: gnulib-tool: support for LDFLAGS, Ralf Wildenhues, 2006/09/08
- Re: gnulib-tool: support for LDFLAGS, LIBDEPS and LTLIBDEPS, Bruno Haible, 2006/09/09
- Re: gnulib-tool: support for LDFLAGS, LIBDEPS and LTLIBDEPS, Ralf Wildenhues, 2006/09/10
- Re: gnulib-tool: support for LDFLAGS, LIBDEPS and LTLIBDEPS, Bruno Haible, 2006/09/11
- Re: *_LDFLAGS vs. *_LDADD vs. *_LIBADD, Bruno Haible, 2006/09/09
- Re: *_LDFLAGS vs. *_LDADD vs. *_LIBADD, Ralf Wildenhues, 2006/09/10
- Re: *_LDFLAGS vs. *_LDADD vs. *_LIBADD,
Bruno Haible <=
- Re: *_LDFLAGS vs. *_LDADD vs. *_LIBADD, Ralf Wildenhues, 2006/09/13