[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: libtool dropping -static-libgcc from LDFLAGS

From: Charles Wilson
Subject: Re: libtool dropping -static-libgcc from LDFLAGS
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 20:59:49 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv: Gecko/20081209 Thunderbird/ Mnenhy/

Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Which patch?  I see no reference to a patch in those messages.
> ;-)

Ralf said in 2005:
> Does it work then (and not put `-lgcc_s' iN C++ postdeps)?
> If so, I can try to come up with a proper fix.

So, it's not a "patch" per se. Granted, the OP never did reply in the
end, with whether CC='gcc -static-libgcc' worked for him.

> I don't see where this has anything particular to do with either Cygwin
> nor MinGW.

I'm not familiar with how widespread the use of the -static-* and
-shared-* flags are; I just know that forthcoming gcc-4.[34] packages
for cygwin and mingw will support them.  The cygwin version will default
to using the shared runtime libraries, but (for whatever reason) Corinna
was building a new release candidate 'file' package using gcc4 and
wanted the static runtime.  The mingw gcc4 will default to using static
runtime libraries (but, for now, exception handling across DLLs will be
broken unless -shared-libgcc, so *I* would want -shared-libgcc, on that
platform).  Hence, my focus on "cygwin" and "mingw", specifically.

> A fix for this should probably allow -shared-* and -static-* through,
> but also make sure that picked-up dependencies from deplibs and from
> postdeps don't contain those which aren't desired.  Ideally with a
> testsuite test.

Okay, but frankly I have no idea how to implement this -- and I would
rather not destabilize either of my cygwin systems to install the
(experimental) gcc4 packages -- which would be necessary to develop said
test cases.

Maybe on linux, if -[static|shared]-libgcc is a common, multiplatform


reply via email to

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