[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: libtool-1.5.14 make check

From: Ralf Wildenhues
Subject: Re: libtool-1.5.14 make check
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 15:50:12 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.1i

Hi Bob,

* Bob Friesenhahn wrote on Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 03:29:49PM CET:
> On Tue, 22 Mar 2005, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> >
> >Please look if your installed /opt/gnu/gcc-2.95.2 tree contains a shared
> >libstdc++.  If so, where is it?  Show output of
> > echo 'int main() {return 0;}' > a.cc
> > /opt/gnu/gcc-2.95.2/bin/g++ -v -o a a.cc
> >
> >If that tree has no shared libstdc++, I'm unsure what to do here, short
> >of disabling shared libs for this old C++ compiler on Solaris.  I
> >believe, however, that gcc-2.95 does provide shared libstdc++ for it in
> >principle.  Linking against an external libstdc++ should be much more
> >error-prone.
> Building libstdc++ and other GCC libraries as shared libraries was 
> (and perhaps still is) not the default.

I guess.  Looking at some install trees around here: seems enabled by
default with gcc >= 3.2 (at most), disabled by default with gcc <= 2.95.x.

> It is a necessary option that 
> the person who builds/installs GCC needs to be aware of.  It is not 
> feasable to build C++ shared libraries without a shared libstdc++.

So do you think Libtool needs to take care of this?

Should we disable shared libraries for C++ in `configure' if we cannot
link a small example program using libstdc++?  Do people write useful
C++ libraries without referencing any symbol from libstdc++?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]